Release Of Forensic Dna Results For Sierra Kills Sample

[Guest Thepattywagon]

I doubt a scientist would publish a paper based on DNA evidence from a sample of unknown provenance and without a clear and unquestionable link to the species being studied.

And there's the rub. What exactly is "provenance" when it's evidence from a species that technically doesn't exist......yet?

[Guest]

Tyler,

As far as transparency, I appreciate you desire to be transparent, but when manuscripts are being developed for publication in scientific journals the rules for referees and the peer review process require confidentiality of both the referees and the authors. This is why Melbas study with her co-authors has remained confidential.

With respect to integrity, I can speak to my relationship with her. As a submitter she's always been straight forward with me. I'm sure things were said that shouldn't have been said and so on, but in no way does that effect the science done.

The burden of answering your last question is with you. Your report states that there is a "major" contributor of bear along with human contamination. Are you certain and can you provide evidence that no other mammalian amplifications occurred? The study is unclear and unsubstantial in terms of providing raw data. If you really want to be completely transparent you should post the complete report including all "raw data".

BTW, this is not just "jargon".

DR

[Cisco]

Tyler, after further reflection, I've changed my mind and agree with your point. You're right, if you had waited to release your results after MK, you would have been accused of trying to sabotage her study or "ride her coattails," as you put it earlier.

So, that brings us full circle to the million dollar question:

Will MK's results mirror the ones you have or will they be different?

Something tells me they will be different and the explanation will be well beyond my limited scientific understanding.

[southernyahoo]

Yes we do

They are not public that I'm aware of.

What would that prove? The only two contributors have been identified.

It proves you didn't consider yourself part of the chain of custody. See also below.

DId you not read the very first page of this thread and read the report that is attached there?

The Trent report identified a haplotype which they did not name and which thousands if not millions of people belong to. Justin may belong to that type but it doesn't isolate him as the source, hence the wording "could not be excluded" instead of a "match". BTW, why 3 swabs from Justin? When I first read the report I figured 2 of them were likely you and Bart.

Not true - As GenesRUs pointed out - it's quite normal to start with a homogenizing of the whole sample.

It might be if you were not trying to isolate contamination and or find uncontaminated tissue. Blending it all together ensures the contamination gets mixed in with everything.

The second round of testing has clearly been stated (many many times) to have attempted to remove contamination, by doing a single strand hair test.

The report said the hair was treated for extraction. Does that mean washed, or it was thrown right into process as is?

In said test, there was essentially only one contributor - Bear. The minute trace of human contamination still present at that point, was so small that they could not even get a viable sequence out of it to compare against any other human DNA to try to match it.

If the report had mentioned washing the samples prior to extraction I wouldn't have a question here, but it leaves the door open here that the bear DNA was contamination. Hair shaft extraction would have been a different process from tissue as I understand it, unless the extraction was done on a hair root. I may need to reread the report to see if it even mentions different methods for Huggins 1 and 2. I didn't catch it if it did.

[Guest]

Well, no matter what is argued here, we know that the sample Smeja provided to Tyler and Bart will NOT confirm for BF.

I suppose one could argue it was "contaminated" with bear..but this was tested by TWO independent labs and there was no other *UNKNOWN* DNA present that would point to BF. In any event...we won't be getting any confirmation for anything Smeja provides...boots aside for now.

The only remaining *silver lining*..if there is one...would be that Smeja gave Ketchum a DIFFERENT sample that indeed came from the purported BF KILL. I wouldn't place too much hope on that scenario.

[Guest]

GenesRus,

I absolutely agree, whole Gnome sequencing is essentiol when developing phylogenic trees. A reputable university in the US utilized the illumina technology to whole Gnome sequence the sample provided by Justin and myself. A full Gnome of 2.7 million bp's, complete phylogenic trees, methodology to ensure no contamination, and bioinformatics report have been completed on the Justin Smeja sample. The results from the whole Gnome in no way resemble the Tyler and Bart report, neither did the results from the initial PCR amplifications that were completed prior to sending out the sample for whole Gnome sequencing. All of this information including the raw data FASTA files will be available as part of Melbas manuscript.

Any other questions will be answered as soon as the study is made available.

DR

Happy New Year everybody!!

[Guest Thepattywagon]

Okay then. Thanks Derek.

[Guest FootDude]

Do you know Dr. Ketchum by any chance? Did Dr. Ketchum ask you to come here and perpetuate the suggestion that Justin gave her a "real" piece of tissue and gave us and others a bear piece,?

That's a fair question and the answer is no and no.

I do find it odd that you ask about Smeja giving Ketchum a 'real' piece and you bear meat since I never posted that.

IMO there is not enough evidence either way to prove exactly what has happened here and in fact all the questions I have are going to be answered in peer-review anyways.

I have no qualms in waiting for her paper to be published or tossed out for whatever valid reasons they may find.

Ok sure thing, "logic and reason" in other words, blindly believe what you've been told and encourage others to do the same.

That's a very interesting post.

TBH what first perked my curiosity was your insistence of using the bear DNA to focus on Ketchum and not on Justin Smeja's story. To me with Trent's testing showing that what Justin gave you was bear meat it's reasonable to now question Smeja's truthfulness further but in fact you've doubled-down on both his truthfulness and story. When I add to that that based on B&T posts there seems to exists some kind of rift between your camp and Ketchum's then IMO it's simply logical to ask questions. In the end it's yours and Tyler's actions that have further moved me down this road.

Due to the fact that everything you have posted so far, is out of Ketchum's study control protocols and thus here-say I have to examine all the evidence presented in order to ascertain the most likely truths in this matter.

If you have anything definitive that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt what you are implying of Ketchum I suggest you post it.

Edited January 1, 2013 by FootDude

[Guest]

GenesRus,

I absolutely agree, whole Gnome sequencing is essentiol when developing phylogenic trees. A reputable university in the US utilized the illumina technology to whole Gnome sequence the sample provided by Justin and myself. A full Gnome of 2.7 million bp's, complete phylogenic trees, methodology to ensure no contamination, and bioinformatics report have been completed on the Justin Smeja sample. The results from the whole Gnome in no way resemble the Tyler and Bart report, neither did the results from the initial PCR amplifications that were completed prior to sending out the sample for whole Gnome sequencing. All of this information including the raw data FASTA files will be available as part of Melbas manuscript.

Any other questions will be answered as soon as the study is made available.

DR

Happy New Year everybody!!

Just the tone of Derekfoot and Melba display a certain confidence. I am very interested in the release of Melba's paper!

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

So there are allegedly 3 complete Sasquatch genomes sequenced. Does anyone know if Justin's sample was used for one of those three?

[Guest]

Supposedly, yes, Smeja's sample is one of the three for which the whole nuDNA was sequenced.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

Thanks. I think that changes things a lot.

[TimB]

That's according to Lindsay's report from a leak that was subsequently fired, Pter- Melba has never said that.

Tim B.

[Guest BartloJays]

So there are allegedly 3 complete Sasquatch genomes sequenced. Does anyone know if Justin's sample was used for one of those three?

Without question, absolutely

That's a fair question and the answer is no and no.

I do find it odd that you ask about Smeja giving Ketchum a 'real' piece and you bear meat since I never posted that.

IMO there is not enough evidence either way to prove exactly what has happened here and in fact all the questions I have are going to be answered in peer-review anyways.

I have no qualms in waiting for her paper to be published or tossed out for whatever valid reasons they may find.

That's a very interesting post.

TBH what first perked my curiosity was your insistence of using the bear DNA to focus on Ketchum and not on Justin Smeja's story. To me with Trent's testing showing that what Justin gave you was bear meat it's reasonable to now question Smeja's truthfulness further but in fact you've doubled-down on both his truthfulness and story. When I add to that that based on B&T posts there seems to exists some kind of rift between your camp and Ketchum's then IMO it's simply logical to ask questions. In the end it's yours and Tyler's actions that have further moved me down this road.

Due to the fact that everything you have posted so far, is out of Ketchum's study control protocols and thus here-say I have to examine all the evidence presented in order to ascertain the most likely truths in this matter.

If you have anything definitive that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt what you are implying of Ketchum I suggest you post it.

This is a fair enough question and although I believe I made all of this clear throughout the thread, I’ll clarify this for you because it’s a reasonable assumption and unlike your initial posts, was asked absent an unnecessary confrontational tone .

First off, I’ve been assured by Justin that he’ll be making a lengthy statement soon covering exactly what you’re questioning and wondering and will explain the catalyst in us having an “extreme†sense of urgency and concern to vet this sample. That concern from my end was for potential repercussions for the person who financially backed her and is one of my best friend’s, Wally Hersom, Justin (who again, never claimed the tissue was from what was shot, but him and Jack suspected it was) and the whole bigfoot community. I ask that when Justin makes that statement in whatever format he does, you listen carefully because not only is it the truth 100% (and that’s regardless if Dr. Ketchum’s study is successful or not btw…you’ll understand why I’m saying that) but it’s something he’s needed to get off his chest for a long, long time.

For Tyler, there is one primary reason for screening this sample (though he shared my other concerns as well to some extent) and it was to make sure the sample was what it was being proclaimed to be as he didn’t want to see a potential black eye for the field. That also goes without saying that Tyler was supposed to receive a piece from Justin to test back from the beginning as he was the other researcher (besides DR) who initially talked with Justin.

I had two primary concerns with one being suspicion towards Dr. Ketchum based on this “catalyst†exchange to protect those close to me, in addition to an absence of “checks and balances†coupled with the desire by Justin to have someone test the sample he could trust.

In addition, there is no rift between Dr. Ketchum and I or agenda to discredit her as if her study fails it would be a huge disappointment to Tyler and I and not the best thing for this field. I want nothing more than for species recognition (a life’s passion) and everyone who knows me knows, I care little who is ultimately responsible as it’s an inevitable great victory for all of us imo. The only personal contact I’ve ever had with Dr. Ketchum was a brief message exchange in which I recall her being very pleasant, but this was well prior to her exchange with Justin. Again, I’m a huge proponent in this field and know for absolute certainty these animals, or whatever you prefer to call them, exist. But I’m also smart enough to know that based on the understandable perception of viability from the standpoint of the scientific community and the world in general, the process must be clean.

The reason you suspect we’re doubling down on Justin (which we aren’t as I can’t prove the incident he claimed to have happened, did in fact happen and unlike others... I’ve never “guaranteed†or promised anybody anything I can't prove) is because nothing has changed in that Justin has been 100% truthful with me (and Tyler) since I’ve known him and has made every right decision behind the scenes within his power, including wanting to test his samples independently when he and Jack had ample reason to believe they were being inappropriately examined (again based off the exchange he had with Dr. Ketchum) instead of shielding himself behind her claim. He also valued his credibility over monetary opportunities that would’ve appeared shady if only by perception and waived on capitalizing on them though I’m sure (actually I know) he could’ve used the cash. Furthermore, he’s done nothing but cooperate 100% and has gone through great lengths and trouble to try and satisfy his naysayers, including taking and passing a polygraph “he†insisted on taking and I know from knowing him, believes they work as opposed to those who consider them junk science.

At the end of the day, I’ve stated nothing differently than the incident will remain forever anecdotal in nature (even perceived as less) without substantiating physical evidence. He’s also under no other illusion.

In addition, you’re ignoring the point that to different degrees, Tyler and I had very little confidence in this tissue being what it was purported to be (by circumstances of finding/time and mistrust created by Dr. Ketchum) and claimed to be by Dr. Ketchum. The evidence in that is in various interviews and radio shows where I wasn’t shy in my opinion over the last 18 months; hence these results were not a shock to Tyler and I, they were expected more so than the alternative. What gave us periodic hope was through some of the email communications with Trent, you’ll see for yourself soon, in which it appeared we had crossed several hurdles through the process.

To you, the results are “news,†to us it wasn’t, hence there’s no knee-jerk reaction. What complicates things even more is getting legitimate thermal footage 300 yds from where he claimed the event happened 23 months later (which all witnesses with me and those who independently worked on it know what the subjects are). From my standpoint, it will be a shame if Justin is never vindicated through the physical evidence, but at least we’ve got an active seasonal area that has produced compelling and well-documented visual evidence (with analysis/circumstances more so than visually impressionable).

To those who suggest Dr. Ketchum should not be challenged with conflicting evidence because she’s handcuffed by study protocols is asinine when you have an opportunity to consider what the catalyst of urgently getting independent examination is in the first place…and you will but I think it’s appropriate it comes from Justin. Again, we're sharing results in a transparent manner, this is not a "direct" or "personal" challenge to her.

Furthermore, Tyler and I take significant issue with those who would suggest making results from these two reputable labs transparent was some kind of coordinated attack on Ketchum as we even tried (initiated by her) to get some third party verification in 11^th hour to delay these findings in case of some proven error. We did not test the tissue ourselves, and we’re not responsible for the findings, but we’ll take responsibility in sharing them because although being the bearer of bad news may not be the ideal place to be, we know it’s the right thing to do…. without question. I wished to god the findings were different but according to our labs that’s not the case and I can tell you right now, from what I’ve been told by the other lab director, the second report (which is due any day) is even more definitive in their conclusions and they specialize in “human†dna.

On a positive note, the trials and errors we experienced as two “amateur†researchers (which is self-proclaimed btw, so the attempted condescending reminder by you in tone in a prior post was unnecessary) is well documented and others can learn from them looking towards the future. Tyler carefully documented protocols that I think are imperative for future researchers who are laymen with respect to diagnostics. I’m sure that's something we can all agree that is a potentially positive thing for this field that desperately needs some direction with respect to standards.

I hope that sheds some light, if it doesn’t I don’t know what to tell you as it’s the truth 100%, hence claims of ulterior motives will never be proven…because they don’t exist.

Edited January 1, 2013 by BartloJays

[Guest COGrizzly]

Starting out the new year with the humor of "amateur" eh, Bart?? Nice. Yeh, yer such an "amateur".