Guest Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 (edited) I'd expect they would work hard to get every kink out of it , then it would go to the top of the list for print wouldn't you think? The editor can always make the decision to move a paper up in the priority list. Science has an expedited publishing policy, but they were burned pretty badly by it with respect to the Ivory-billed Woodpecker announcement a few years ago. I suspect they'd be extra cautious about rushing any kind of "crypto" paper. Edited February 10, 2011 by Saskeptic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Yeah, but crypto creatures don't have DNA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Mike, you may be thinking of the DNA study by Dr Melba Ketchum. From what I understand the paper is in peer review for the moment. How long will it remain in peer review is the question. .... Chris B. Chris This is news to me, the last I heard her talk she said they would submit in the spring. Can you give a source for your information? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 ... Just as an aside, there is a paper title, "Molecular phylogenetic analyses indicate extensive morphological convergence between the 'yeti' and primates", which resulted when geneticists analyzed a hair which was definitively identified as coming from a yeti, but found that it belonged to a horse. The paper even included a drawing of the yeti family tree, showing the ape-like yeti coming from a line of ungulates. It appeared in Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, a peer-reviewed journal. AJ Perhaps u should read the article more carefully...it's an April fool's joke!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 (edited) AJ,you wrote "There was a result from that Snell Grove Lake sample, which indicated that bigfoots were somewhere between the ape-human split and human. Given the humanoid features of Patty and suspected bigfoot prints, that makes sense. Then again, the Snell Grove Lake sample was a single sample loaded with zinc (which cleaves DNA), so who knows." ---------- AJ, you should be aware that the Snelgrove Lake sample contained a single polymorphism different from Anglos but characteristic of the tribal members living nearby. Meldrum and the guy Nelson who did the analysis are both distancing themselves from any other interpretation other than human. Nelson deals with insects and just didn't grasp the issue initially. Also I think you are confusing metallic zinc with a class of proteins called zinc fingers, one of which is used to cleave DNA. Excess metallic Zinc interferes with lab analysis by causing aggregation, not cleavage. Edited February 11, 2011 by parnassus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 The Snelgrove Lake sample contained a single polymorphism different from Anglos but characteristic of the tribal members living nearby. Any references for this Parnassus? Are you saying that the DNA was native american? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 I would add that the upcoming Paulides Ketchum project is almost certainly an effort to pass off the unique properties of the hair and DNA of tribal persons as those of bigfoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RioBravo Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Some interesting info here: http://www.sasquat.com/2011/01/us-genforscher-entschlusseln-sasquatch.html Scroll down a bit for the english part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 I see that you are saying the Snelgrove Lake sample was native american DNA. How was this determined and distinguished from anglo american? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Any references for this Parnassus? Are you saying that the DNA was native american? It's not published. Just another MonsterQuest thing that wasn't quite all it was cracked up to be. Ask Meldrum the next time u see him. Yes . Snelgrove Lake was just plain old human vandalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheellug Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Some interesting info here: http://www.sasquat.com/2011/01/us-genforscher-entschlusseln-sasquatch.html Scroll down a bit for the english part. Very interesting article! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RioBravo Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 It's not published. Just another MonsterQuest thing that wasn't quite all it was cracked up to be. Ask Meldrum the next time u see him. Yes . Snelgrove Lake was just plain old human vandalism. So I should just take your word for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 Snelgrove Lake was just plain old human vandalism. I'm trying to establish the forensic veracity in the statement that a Native American vandalised the cabin and all you have is Monsterquest? There should have been an ER visit somewhere having to do with holes in foot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 If all Ketchum had was a bunch of random human samples showing "rare" polymorphisms, then those polymorphisms couldn't be all that rare at all. She would make a major discovery: the Pineys, now featured across the US. Get yer banjos out boys! The beauty of Paulides' scheme (as I envision it) is that by collecting specimens from the various tribes he has visited over the past several years, the results will show different individuals with a common background of Native American polymorphisms. Now a human geneticist would probably recognize immediately what was going on...a vet, like Ketchum, maybe not so much. To her, Tribal people's DNA may look like something "from another planet." or, more to the point, an "uncatalogued primate." So my prediction is that sometime between now and sommer, there is going to be at least one very red face in south Texas, while Paulides desperately tries to blame it on the injuns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 (edited) So I should just take your word for it? You can do whatever you like. The Snelgrove finding have never been published or even submitted for publication so why would you believe it was not human? Would it mean something to you if I gave you the numerical location and nature of the polymorphism and showed u its worldwide distribution showing it to be characteristic of tribal people in Canada? Probably not. You want ER records and police interviews and suspects DNA. I don't have those things. When investigating acase of vandalism isn't that something you would have asked about if u were Meldrum? but no, it had to have been Bigfoot. Not. I suggested that you ask Meldrum. Ask him what Nelson says now. Ask him if that one polymorphism isn't characteristic of Canadian tribes... Ask him if it wasn't the shows editors who juiced it up and put in conclusions that Nelson now denies. It was Monsterquest. Edited February 11, 2011 by parnassus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts