Guest WldHrtRnch Posted April 8, 2013 Posted April 8, 2013 Interesting article I found on facebook regarding the online publishing of scientific journals. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/08/health/for-scientists-an-exploding-world-of-pseudo-academia.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0
Guest Posted April 8, 2013 Posted April 8, 2013 I vote that all Ketchum threads be locked. As the cop on South Park would say..."Nothing to see here people. Move along, move along."
southernyahoo Posted April 8, 2013 Posted April 8, 2013 Apparently Ketchum doesn't know her Ass from a LLama! proof resides here! http://ketchum.smugm...42397766&k=CRHqHV9 So let me ask TM and SY etc. If she cannot tell the difference between a llama and a donkey - (remember she is a vet!) should she be trusted in telling theDNA of a bigfoot from the DNA of a bear? or human? I didn't see any DNA in the photo! probably mislabled...Those walls at Machu Picchu fascinate me as much as bigfoot also.
Sunflower Posted April 8, 2013 Posted April 8, 2013 (edited) I vote that all Ketchum threads be locked. As the cop on South Park would say..."Nothing to see here people. Move along, move along." Isn't that kind one-sided? I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of people who want to see. Are you afraid the truth may be forthcoming??? Personally I love reading this thread. Edited April 9, 2013 by chelefoot To bring into compliance
Guest Posted April 8, 2013 Posted April 8, 2013 I vote that all Ketchum threads be locked. As the cop on South Park would say..."Nothing to see here people. Move along, move along." While I wish this was all over, I don't think we have heard the last from MK. I don't feel it will be done until MK retracts her paper, and I don't see her doing that. This thread may dry up if MK doesn't say anything inflammatory or outright wrong, but I don't see that happening either. And we are still waiting for her expert reviewers with their independent evaluations and statements of support....
southernyahoo Posted April 8, 2013 Posted April 8, 2013 Are you able to do extractions on hair follicles yourself Ridgerunner?
Guest Posted April 8, 2013 Posted April 8, 2013 I have extracted DNA from many tissues, but not hair follicles. Same principle, but perhaps lower yields than I would be use to.
southernyahoo Posted April 8, 2013 Posted April 8, 2013 It might be fun to try it on a couple human control samples then maybe once on a couple suspect samples.
Guest thermalman Posted April 8, 2013 Posted April 8, 2013 (edited) There is nothing to say that the human like DNA is not from two sources. Given the nature of this sample, it could not have been "decontaminated" by washing as was reported to have been done with the hair samples. Again, the pure human sequences is only from those regions that have some homology to human. I know this sounds like Catch 22 in some respects, which is why I went back an blasted each piece separately. When it comes back as 99-100% human for 40 sequences, well its human. The remaining 15% or so is likely contamination - given what this sample is, it HAS to have, at minimum, DNA from the many critters that normally live in ones mouth. Not that these other sequences should be present in the contig. Now remember that this contig only represents 0.5% of what is suppose to be there. Again, the method for assembly of this contig was using Hu Ch11 as a reference so it is possible they only pulled out the human sequences of the pool. IMO, if they could only find 0.5% of the chromosome, they are either rather unskilled in making their contigs or their genomes are not 30X, but more like 1/30X. Perhaps the vast majority of their sequence is from the microbes that is present in the mouth of this "creature". Without raw data, it is impossible to know for certain, but that would be my guess for this particular sample. The good news, if this does turn out to be a genuine BF sample, it does possess sufficient homology to Hss that I would have no problem believing it could hybridize with modern human. I would find it rather amusing if MK has stumbled onto naming the species somewhat accurately (being Homo sapiens something), while getting the whole nuDNA work so wrong. But again, I have not seen any data that proves this sample is from BF, or that the sample is not just plain Hss. I don't think this sample will be the type specimen. No problem rr. Once you've figured out the truth, you're more than welcome to come across the line to the fun side! Edited April 8, 2013 by thermalman
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted April 9, 2013 Posted April 9, 2013 “Well, Justin, I got special ways of testing stuff. I got special ways of making things seem different than they really are.†http://seesdifferent...rn-human-being/ “All right, how about this: you don’t even have to destroy the sample. You can keep the sample. But I’ll teach you how to make that sample read something different than what it is.†“Because, I just told you, that when another place tests this it comes back as like, a regular animal ’cause they don’t understand how to do it, because like there’s a special way that we test it.†Given what we know, I don't find these quotes hard to believe.
Guest Posted April 9, 2013 Posted April 9, 2013 Well let’s see … what have we written about on BFF. These are simply my wording recollections and IMHO… Bigfoot is either real or its all a HOAX… The Melba Ketchum paper is either real or an attempted HOAX.. The Justin Smega Sierra Kills is either real or a HOAX Oh yeah Rick Dyer was mentioned The thousands of documented Bigfoot encounters by people all over the world are either the truth, partial truth or are part of the largest most complex HOAX in the history of the world. Genbank does not currently have a genome for Bigfoot…. Genbank would not initially accept the data Melba supplied for her paper. Genbank has since accepted Melba’s data results and will include in GenBank Comparisions of Melba’s data results are currently in the works or will be soon and will take about 5 months to have results. (Maybe in August ?) Melba Ketchum has worked about 5 years on the “Paper†Melba received over 200 different samples claimed to be Bigfoot. Melba accepted about 168 samples for her study. Her tests found 111 of 168 (not 111 of 111) that were reported to be of Bigfoot origin We know about the Purchase of the Journal oh hum… There are believers that will always believe in Bigfoot There are Skeptics and Scoff’s that will do anything to NOT recognize Bigfoot Melba’s actions have created a new biased group with a “ Bash Melba mentality†Agendas have a definite turn off value to discerning readers.. Because Melba is not of the Academic Worldly Scientific community grouping ….. the Upper level of Academia has attempted to dismiss her findings… There are many in the Mainstream Academic grouping that will do anything to derail Melba’s Paper. Sykes started his study nearly a year ago…. With a December deadline Sykes is currently 3 months overdue from his announced December deadline Sykes has reportedly changed his timeline and probably methodology and position on Bigfoot There is no “Media backlash†because Sykes is a big part of the Academic world. Justin Smega reportedly killed a “male†Bigfoot and a juvenile Bigfoot…. Melba ran tests (including a complete Genome) on a “Steak from that Bigfoot… Melba claims the results of HER sample tested Bigfoot Melba discussed with Justin about messing with his remaining “Steak†Justin sent another (different) sample to another lab that tested THAT sample as Bear… BTW, Justin is sticking to his story (he killed two Bigfoot and not bear) Millions of DNA tests have been accurately done since the human Genome was Sequenced A DNA test requires just minutes to place the required Evidence in a vial and seal it… then mail to the testing agency. The evidence (on swabs in a vial ) is then compared to a data base like GenBank… A month or 2 later the results are released back to the testee IMHO…. If the Bigfoot Genome were in GenBank it would all end here. It should be that simple…. Mail it in and WAIT for the results IF Bigfoot is real, it would be a SLAM DUNK IF Bigfoot is a HOAX then it is a HOAX. Bigfoot samples have been genetically tested for years (years before Melba) The results have mostly come back with known results, such as Bear, etc. or human contamination. What few folks are considering Testing for Bigfoot has consistently produced finding(s) with known results (e.g. Bear) or ( not and/or) human contamination… BUT the test results hardly EVER list “also with human contamination†even though humans collect all tests… The Human contamination THINGY and the mtDNA cannot be explained Melba says she has nailed the primers and sequencing … we shall see But what if every previous attempt at the primer and sequencing was done wrong and her primer and sequencing IS RIGHT…. Less we forget….. this is now all about GENETICS and testing and comparisons ........ not attacks and speculation Melba appears to have moved on to the next stage and insists she is right and time will prove her right. Again Little Grasshoppers …… we shall see …. Let us wait ….. we have the time. It should now be down to the Genetics … and that will be the final nail in the coffin or the Holy Grail of Bigfoot will belong to Melba Again all of this is just IMHO
Guest thermalman Posted April 9, 2013 Posted April 9, 2013 You forgot to add SC, that you had your encounter with BF, which in my mind, trumps any BF rebuttals by those who argue against its existence, based solely on the science.
Guest Posted April 9, 2013 Posted April 9, 2013 I just realized something: Melba should try to submit to RHI. She certainly would get a fair hearing there.
Guest Posted April 9, 2013 Posted April 9, 2013 (edited) Rejected Hominid Interpretation? Edited April 9, 2013 by PacNWSquatcher
Guest Posted April 9, 2013 Posted April 9, 2013 I just realized something: Melba should try to submit to RHI. She certainly would get a fair hearing there. So you are suggesting that she has been treated unfairly? You support her paper and it's conclusions? Are you a geneticist with the qualifications to interpret her data?
Recommended Posts