The Ketchum Report (Continued)

[Guest]

I think Shboom2 inadvertently hit the nail on the head for this whole thing..."The Epitome of Gibberish"

[Guest]

For the record, I am not certain the 3% is a reference to degree of homology. It seems more in line with the amount of sequence present that is human (or at least mammalian) in relation to what should be there. My analysis of MK's data shows high degree of homology to human where it is homologous. It is just interspersed with equally highly homologous sequences to bear (sample 26) or Canine (140). But the total amount of sequence that is homologous to mammals is more like 2% complete (for Ch11).

The multiple ~100bp stretches are each highly homologous (near 100%) to a given species. The contig sequences presented appear to be an amalgam of ~100bp sequences (ie one individual read from the illumina sequencer) from human, bear, and probably bacterial/protozoa or human, canine, something. This was then spliced together to the final contig.

What is missing is about 98% of Ch11 - the contigs are just very, very incomplete, even with putting multiple species together as one. I am not sure there is any truly novel sequences here - just a novel compilation of sequences. Sample 31, which I initially thought was the least interesting due to its size, is mostly pure human sequences (about 85% pure at almost 100% homology), but again only ~0.5% complete (with respect to chromosome 11).

I previously reported that the sequences were not highly homologous to each other. This is largely in part that they have separate regions of the "mammalian" sequences that were splice together - hence when you align them, there are lots of mismatches as most of the sequences are not represented in both sequences. Comparing back to the reference human CH11, they are more much more homologous to this reference, but again very incomplete.

The contigs still do not represent any new species, and as such, I don't think there is any need to entertain any hybridization theories. Given that the contigs are by design an assembled sequence, the only conclusion I can come to is again that it was a mixed sample that was spliced together.

That said, I am not dismissing the possibility of hybridization or a highly human like origin for BF. But again, the data presented in the MK manuscript does not support the conclusions. The hair sample analysis may be fine, as may (some of) the mtDNA, but neither positively identifies a new species. If MK would have stopped here, it would have been better (though still not conclusive).

But the nuDNA results (improperly assembled and hence very wrong, IMO) are totally being interpreted to support her beliefs rather than scientific reasoning. While MK's dialog is interesting in understanding the thought process that lead to her conclusions, the end results remain the same.

The data speaks for itself.

[Guest Tyler H]

Is it fair then RR, to say that the speech that the Data has created about itself is "I am an amalgam of sequences from known animals, and there is nothing in me to indicate support for a novel, unidentified species"?

(NOt saying the report rules out any theories - just that it provides NO support for any theories)

[Guest]

Wow. Looks like my early gut instincts about MK were probably right. I feel bad for her, I think she needs help.

[Guest]

RR, I did read your entire post above though. Thanks!

Edited April 16, 2013 by apehuman

[Guest]

Is it fair then RR, to say that the speech that the Data has created about itself is "I am an amalgam of sequences from known animals, and there is nothing in me to indicate support for a novel, unidentified species"?

(NOt saying the report rules out any theories - just that it provides NO support for any theories)

Only the first 5000bp or so has "spoken" to me (from each of the contigs, although the precise language was somewhat less than perfect English), but if they represent the rest of the voices of their remaining sequences, then I would conclude their consensus opinion is that they do not rule out anything, and prove nothing either.

It is possible, but I am guessing remotely, that full analysis of the human components of the amalgam (most likely 31 if any) MAY show some subtle, statistically significant, deviation from established human sequence that could suggest at least a variant of human that might be interesting. So far, I have not seen anything like this, and this is ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CONCLUSION REPORTED OR SUGGESTED BY MK. But it remains a glimmer of hope. IF there is any remaining data (I am currently of the opinion that the coverage of the data is not 30x but 1/30x resulting in the very partial contigs), this would be likely required to substantiate the statistical significance of any such deviation.

[Guest]

I said it in the blogpost thread and I'll paraphrase it again here:

All the woman had to do was analyze the DNA and report the DNA. That's all she had to do. But she had to "swing for the fences" and went places that were never going to go over well with the scientific PTB. At this point, she could have the most prefect DNA in the world and no one will give her data a decent hearing, esp after the IM leaks.

I stand by every thing I said about how Science should be handling this situation: by debunking the data with data of equal or superior weight and amount.

As of today, I don't see that happening. Does she have the DNA goods? I still think it very possible that she does. Do I think it makes any difference? Not any more. Talk about a wasted opportunity...

*a thoroughly frustrated Mulder goes off to bang his head against a wall*

[Drew]

I can't believe it took this long for you to get frustrated.

Hands icepak to Mulder.

[Guest J Sasq Doe]

If this person, Leonid Kruglyak, cannot make an infomed opinion, how can you expect anyone to??

It's really not so much the "who", but the "what". It doesn't matter who the person is, if they do not have access to all of Ketchum's study-related data.

[Guest]

Does she now consider all of her data the all-elusive code that goes w/that one book? I'd say she has a better chance of ending up on Ancient Aliens than releasing any data. It would've already been done if there was something to it. You can only delay something so long before you have to forfeit.

Edited April 16, 2013 by PacNWSquatcher

[Guest J Sasq Doe]

Gibberish? IMO, some of your posts are the epitome of gibberish. I have no idea what you just said, and I'm sure I'm not alone.

I certainly have no doubts that you are not alone.

as Tyler has mentioned here recently

And as Bart has said

Oh I agree that you are not alone.

[Guest J Sasq Doe]

Well here's some of what I couldn't release until now. Hope this answers some questions and clears some things up. Obviously it will bring up new questions. Please do not discuss any of the religious aspects of this article in this thread or on the main forums. Stick to "Beings" or "Beliefs" instead of delving into the deeper aspects of it that go against the rules of this forum. Please lets keep the discussion to the science side of it.

http://bigfootforums...have-wings.html

Firstly, unfortunately, I must say that I wasted a few minutes of my life reading the above link. I will not get those minutes back.

Secondly, what does any of that have to do with Ketchum's study? I'll answer that for you. It has nothing to do with her study.

Thirdly, unless you can provide names, sources, transcripts, etc., then it can only be considered fiction. Even if some of it is real, the editing negates it. no context, etc.

Let's all just get back to the study. This National Enquirer line of thought is totally irrelevant to the study and its conclusions.

[Guest]

Oh I agree that you are not alone.

Of course not - most folks are able to plainly see the problems with the study.

[Guest]

Here's the thing I don't understand - assuming the screenshots are true, Ketchum claims that Bigfoot managed to breed the human out of their species and can no longer mate with HSS. However, they still retain human mtDNA as a result of the hybridization. In other words, they were attempting to breed the human out of their species, but only by mating with female direct descendants of the first generation hybrid females. If they were truly trying to eliminate HSS from their species, wouldn't they exclude those females from breeding? Moreover, they were able to hybridize with HSS when they had no human DNA whatsoever, at least according to Ketchum. So, why would a species that is genetically more similar to humans be less able to interbreed than when they were less similar?

[Guest Tyler H]

I said it in the blogpost thread and I'll paraphrase it again here:

All the woman had to do was analyze the DNA and report the DNA. That's all she had to do. But she had to "swing for the fences" and went places that were never going to go over well with the scientific PTB. At this point, she could have the most prefect DNA in the world and no one will give her data a decent hearing, esp after the IM leaks.

I stand by every thing I said about how Science should be handling this situation: by debunking the data with data of equal or superior weight and amount.

As of today, I don't see that happening. Does she have the DNA goods? I still think it very possible that she does. Do I think it makes any difference? Not any more. Talk about a wasted opportunity...

*a thoroughly frustrated Mulder goes off to bang his head against a wall*

"At this point, she could have the most prefect DNA in the world and no one will give her data a decent hearing, esp after the IM leaks."

I wholeheartedly disagree - MANY reputable scientists have looked at her data - if it seemed sound, and certainly if it was "the most perfect DNA in the world" I Know for a fact that some very reputable scientists would be all over it, regardless of leaks, and whackiness.

Well here's some of what I couldn't release until now. Hope this answers some questions and clears some things up. Obviously it will bring up new questions. Please do not discuss any of the religious aspects of this article in this thread or on the main forums. Stick to "Beings" or "Beliefs" instead of delving into the deeper aspects of it that go against the rules of this forum. Please lets keep the discussion to the science side of it.

http://bigfootforums...have-wings.html

Firstly, unfortunately, I must say that I wasted a few minutes of my life reading the above link. I will not get those minutes back.

Secondly, what does any of that have to do with Ketchum's study? I'll answer that for you. It has nothing to do with her study.

Thirdly, unless you can provide names, sources, transcripts, etc., then it can only be considered fiction. Even if some of it is real, the editing negates it. no context, etc.

Let's all just get back to the study. This National Enquirer line of thought is totally irrelevant to the study and its conclusions.

JSD - If you read any posts other than your own, MAYYYBe you could not see the significance of njjohn's post - it has to do with the low degree to which MK's samples match human. SHe acknowledges that they are less "like us" than chickens are... yet she thinks we can mate.

Also, some people pulled information from njjohn's report, and were able to somehow get hold of the whole conversation from facebook - they were trying to attack njjohn, but they proved that the conversations was real, and not fabricated. Deal with it. (or not... the multitude of JSD's that write these posts seem to collectively reject evidence all the time.)