Jump to content

Release Of Forensic Dna Results For Sierra Kills Sample

Guest Tyler H

By Guest Tyler H
in General Bigfoot Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest FootDude

Guest FootDude

Posted
Posted

I think based on your unsubstantiated statements of fact we should ask who your actions serve?

Logic, reason, and sound critical analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
southernyahoo Sasquatch

southernyahoo

Posted
Posted

My grievances with this thread is that there is infortmation still witheld. We don't have statements from Justin about the provenance of the samples submittied to both Ketchum and T/B. The entire chain of custody has not been tested. It is not confirmed the human DNA is from Justin/ atleast not in a report we can read. All the questions that can be asked of the evidence and answered through testing is not complete. The samples seem to be tested without removal of any contamination. If this were done, there would be a single contributor and no rollercoaster ride. If I wanted that I would visit Six Flags.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Scout1959

Guest Scout1959

Posted
Posted

Logic, reason, and sound critical analysis.

Another excellent post.

My grievances with this thread is that there is infortmation still witheld. We don't have statements from Justin about the provenance of the samples submittied to both Ketchum and T/B. The entire chain of custody has not been tested. It is not confirmed the human DNA is from Justin/ atleast not in a report we can read. All the questions that can be asked of the evidence and answered through testing is not complete. The samples seem to be tested without removal of any contamination. If this were done, there would be a single contributor and no rollercoaster ride. If I wanted that I would visit Six Flags.

And another excellent post. (especially about the blending without decontaminating the sample)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ronnie Bass Oh Mah

Ronnie Bass

Posted
Posted

Well the 'bud' comment sounds a bit defensive so I have to wonder why you would respond that way?

We seemed to be in agreement that motives are to be considered, as to what folks motives are I would think that in reading through the thread each should contemplate that for themselves. It's not my (nor your) place to assign those motives to others minds. But imho the motives are pretty obvious. Petty rivalry would top the list for most if not all.

Holy Overreaction! Nope, meant nothing by it.

But I do see this morning you don't seem to be following your own advice, high-fiving those who are attacking Bart & Tyler's work and words, it seem the people you're siding with are either associated with Ketchum or at the very least side with her and her work. Have you considered what their motives might be as you lectured everyone yesterday to do?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Scout1959

Guest Scout1959

Posted
Posted

Holy Overreaction! Nope, meant nothing by it.

But I do see this morning you don't seem to be following your own advice, high-fiving those who are attacking Bart & Tyler's work and words, it seem the people you're siding with are either associated with Ketchum or at the very least side with her and her work. Have you considered what their motives might be as you lectured everyone yesterday to do?

I personal don't care a wit about Ketchum and have no association with her or others involved with her.

Yes I understand their motives but aren't they expressing concern over others motives? All I'm doing is supporting them voicing their opinion.

If you want to call them out go ahead. I'm happy to listen.

And since this thread is about the opposing tests aren't the motives of those involved in those tests the logical ones to question here? Ketchum's and her supporters motives are to be called out in the other thread.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Scout1959

Guest Scout1959

Posted
Posted

Holy Overreaction! Nope, meant nothing by it.

But I do see this morning you don't seem to be following your own advice, high-fiving those who are attacking Bart & Tyler's work and words, it seem the people you're siding with are either associated with Ketchum or at the very least side with her and her work. Have you considered what their motives might be as you lectured everyone yesterday to do?

Oh and I don't see how I was over reacting? It was a question?

And as to Ketchum's motives, I do honestly have a huge problem (if her conclusions in her report are accurately reported) with her interpretation of her data. BUT, those motives that I would question and their discussion are forbidden here in this forum so I have no choice but to sit on my hands and hope that once her report comes out that others are allowed to reinterpret the data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Curious the lengths the B&T proponents are going to in order to keep Smeja from appearing deceitful...

Curious the insistence on the part of Smeja-bashers to keep misrepresenting what he said about obtaining the sample to suit their own agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bipedalist Sasquatch

bipedalist

Posted
BFF Patron
Posted

Wude all out of plusses but the "plus fairy" appreciates your brand of humor....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ronnie Bass Oh Mah

Ronnie Bass

Posted
Posted (edited)

I personal don't care a wit about Ketchum and have no association with her or others involved with her.

Yes I understand their motives but aren't they expressing concern over others motives? All I'm doing is supporting them voicing their opinion.

Now I'm really curious, you keep acting like you don't have a horse in this race, so why are you showing support to them?

And believe me, you could support them all you want and I wouldn't give a care in the world, everyone is entitled to their opinion. But though out this thread you have been very painfully trying to show your being objective and lecturing everyone to try to see both sides, I'm just not buying it because I'm not seeing it.

If you want to call them out go ahead. I'm happy to listen.

I think I have.

And since this thread is about the opposing tests aren't the motives of those involved in those tests the logical ones to question here? Ketchum's and her supporters motives are to be called out in the other thread.

Then why are you asking to consider motives from both sides in this thread? And the thing is these studies are very much connected, I don't know how anyone can separate them when they are using the same samples.

Oh and I don't see how I was over reacting? It was a question?

Don't be so defensive.

And as to Ketchum's motives, I do honestly have a huge problem (if her conclusions in her report are accurately reported) with her interpretation of her data. BUT, those motives that I would question and their discussion are forbidden here in this forum so I have no choice but to sit on my hands and hope that once her report comes out that others are allowed to reinterpret the data.

You lost me here, what's not allowed to be discussed?

Edited by Ronnie Bass
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Scout1959

Guest Scout1959

Posted
Posted

We will just have to agree that we don't see things on the same level. No biggie.

There are two subjects that are not allowed here and one of them is a major part of how the leaks have portrayed Melba's interpretation of the data. But I've already been warned not to go there so I won't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ronnie Bass Oh Mah

Ronnie Bass

Posted
Posted

Fair enough Scout, plus I think we were heading into an area warned by Ray not to go so lets just leave it at this and sit tight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest wudewasa

Guest wudewasa

Posted
Posted

Wude all out of plusses but the "plus fairy" appreciates your brand of humor....

Someone has to bring levity to all of this heated conjection that is leading nowhere! More to come!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...