The Ketchum Report (Continued)

[TimB]

 

Tim, i am sorry,  but I have been out of the countryfor the past month,  doing actual scientifcic research,  you know,  gathering data that i publish in peer reviewed papers.  Unfortunately,  access to the BFF was blocked because i was originating from a foreign country,  regardless,  i will respond to each point below.

 

 

1st- are you saying YOU are OTLS!  If so, then why didn't you put that information in the blog about this instead of saying "sources I can't reveal?"  If you aren't OTLS!, then you yourself have shown how the cloak and dagger psuedo-journalism that is the bigfoot blogosphere.  Thank you for illustrating that.

 

I am not OTLS.   Didn't even take their word for anything.  I simply verified the information in their posts by tracking to the original sources of the information (for example Gary Stone etc).  I actually personally verified the information posted by Smokie by talking to the original sources of the information.  it's not rocket science,  it is not hard,  it takes Google.  10 minutes, and a desire to know the truth!

 

2nd-  Why would I do the work that the blogger that presents him or herself as an authority on bigfoot and Melba Ketchum refuses to do?

I guess we differ here.  I fact checked a whole lot of info posted in OTLS,  and was able to verify everything i set out to check on.  So in my opinion,  OTLS did do the leg work, and then synthesized the info gathered from many different sources into a well researched cognicent time line.  So I guess i simply do not agree that OTLS is not doing their "work".

Just thought since you did not believe the information, you might want to confirm or refute it by going to the original sources.  apparently i was wrong about that!

 

3rd- While the moderators don't normally allow personal attacks in this venue, I have no problem with what you say.  I have challenged at least two people to cite one example of me taking something as true.  You won't find it.  I don't even believe in bigfoot-  I believe in the possibility of bigfoot.  I find it interesting that you try to demonize anyone that doesn't automatically follow your own unsubstantiated belief system.  My experiences in life lead me to believe that demonization  occurs where facts fail.  Have a nice day!

 

Not sure where you are getting the my "unsubstantiated belief system".  fact is over the past 3 years I have personally run over 10  samples declared to be BF through my DNA lab.  every one of them has been identified -  unfortunately,  each and everyone was clearly identified as a known mammal.  bear, Alpaca, dog,  human,  horse.  I am still searching for substantiation of the existance of BF,  and so far all of the data I have examined has said - "nope".

(BTW Spoiler alert -  Guess what Sykes study says -  including many samples form thesame people and samples that Melba calls highhbrid humans).  Mid october,  but you might as well rev up the spin machine right now -

 

So in my mind, I think I try more than most others for an unbiased examination of purported evidence.  And I have to tell you,  every single "failure" is actuallhy more circumstatial evidence that BF does not exist.

 

 

 

I get it.  Never directly answer the questions but posture as if what you post in response is actually directly responsive to what you were asked. 

 

And then end with an unsubstantiated "spoiler."

 

Love your fact-based posting- thanks!

 

 

Tim B.

[Guest]

Slowstepper what information are you relying on to suggest a "spoiler alert" for Dr. Sykes?

 

Your mention of your own lab testing leads me to believe you know Justin or Bart or Tyler....and were part of the bear analysis......  

I am also thinking Justin got his results from the Iconfilms documentary..and you got those from him.....

and your references to the other sample sources as most likely "not BF" more based on prejudice than information...(or, even your own past testing...a small n perhaps)

 

Please fill us in and clear the smoke you blew in here...

Edited June 20, 2013 by apehuman

[Guest]

 

 

Tim, i am sorry,  but I have been out of the countryfor the past month,  doing actual scientifcic research,  you know,  gathering data that i publish in peer reviewed papers.  Unfortunately,  access to the BFF was blocked because i was originating from a foreign country,  regardless,  i will respond to each point below.

 

 

1st- are you saying YOU are OTLS!  If so, then why didn't you put that information in the blog about this instead of saying "sources I can't reveal?"  If you aren't OTLS!, then you yourself have shown how the cloak and dagger psuedo-journalism that is the bigfoot blogosphere.  Thank you for illustrating that.

 

I am not OTLS.   Didn't even take their word for anything.  I simply verified the information in their posts by tracking to the original sources of the information (for example Gary Stone etc).  I actually personally verified the information posted by Smokie by talking to the original sources of the information.  it's not rocket science,  it is not hard,  it takes Google.  10 minutes, and a desire to know the truth!

 

2nd-  Why would I do the work that the blogger that presents him or herself as an authority on bigfoot and Melba Ketchum refuses to do?

I guess we differ here.  I fact checked a whole lot of info posted in OTLS,  and was able to verify everything i set out to check on.  So in my opinion,  OTLS did do the leg work, and then synthesized the info gathered from many different sources into a well researched cognicent time line.  So I guess i simply do not agree that OTLS is not doing their "work".

Just thought since you did not believe the information, you might want to confirm or refute it by going to the original sources.  apparently i was wrong about that!

 

3rd- While the moderators don't normally allow personal attacks in this venue, I have no problem with what you say.  I have challenged at least two people to cite one example of me taking something as true.  You won't find it.  I don't even believe in bigfoot-  I believe in the possibility of bigfoot.  I find it interesting that you try to demonize anyone that doesn't automatically follow your own unsubstantiated belief system.  My experiences in life lead me to believe that demonization  occurs where facts fail.  Have a nice day!

 

Not sure where you are getting the my "unsubstantiated belief system".  fact is over the past 3 years I have personally run over 10  samples declared to be BF through my DNA lab.  every one of them has been identified -  unfortunately,  each and everyone was clearly identified as a known mammal.  bear, Alpaca, dog,  human,  horse.  I am still searching for substantiation of the existance of BF,  and so far all of the data I have examined has said - "nope".

(BTW Spoiler alert -  Guess what Sykes study says -  including many samples form thesame people and samples that Melba calls highhbrid humans).  Mid october,  but you might as well rev up the spin machine right now -

 

So in my mind, I think I try more than most others for an unbiased examination of purported evidence.  And I have to tell you,  every single "failure" is actuallhy more circumstatial evidence that BF does not exist.

 

 

 

I get it.  Never directly answer the questions but posture as if what you post in response is actually directly responsive to what you were asked. 

 

And then end with an unsubstantiated "spoiler."

 

Love your fact-based posting- thanks!

 

 

Tim B.

 

What questions would you like me to answer answer Tim, obviously i am not understanding, can you lay them out for me?

I appologize, i should never have commented on sykes results.  That is for him to reveal, as I understand it on a documentary on BBC,  channel 4?  october 18? (i'm working off of memory there, so can't 100% garantee date and channel

Slowstepper what information are you relying on to suggest a "spoiler alert" for Dr. Sykes?

 

Your mention of your own lab testing leads me to believe you know Justin or Bart or Tyler....and were part of the bear analysis......  

I am also thinking Justin got his results from the Iconfilms documentary..and you got those from him.....

and your references to the other sample sources as most likely "not BF" more based on prejudice than information...(or, even your own past testing...a small n perhaps)

 

Please fill us in and clear the smoke you blew in here...

Yes I am familiar with Cutino, Huggins, and Smeja.  No Smeja did not tell me the results, I believe he got the results directly from Sykes,  it may have been on camera at the time,  but I do not know that!.

 

My samples,  all 10 of them were 100% positive to species,  not speculation, prejudice, or "most likely., the n number is indeed a small sample size.  but it is instructive that so far -  every one -  not BF,  positively not BF.

 

If those who contributed the samples would like to they can comment on them.  most of the contributors are members here.

 

Not sure where you are getting the my "unsubstantiated belief system".  fact is over the past 3 years I have personally run over 10  samples declared to be BF through my DNA lab.  every one of them has been identified -  unfortunately,  each and everyone was clearly identified as a known mammal.  bear, Alpaca, dog,  human,  horse.  I am still searching for substantiation of the existance of BF,  and so far all of the data I have examined has said - "nope".

(BTW Spoiler alert -  Guess what Sykes study says -  including many samples form thesame people and samples that Melba calls highhbrid humans).  Mid october,  but you might as well rev up the spin machine right now -

 

So in my mind, I think I try more than most others for an unbiased examination of purported evidence.  And I have to tell you,  every single "failure" is actuallhy more circumstatial evidence that BF does not exist.

 

Can you share more details on the samples Slowstepper, like photo's of the samples showing the morphology of the ones that tested human?

 

Sure, as soon as you share tyours!

[Guest]

SS thanks for the reply, although I could use a little clarification.

 

 

Are you saying that all ten of your samples were also from the same samples/sources submitted to Sykes?  

 

Are you also saying that these same samples/sources were the same supplied to Ketchum?

 

I think I read Sykes only received about 35 or so....but I have no idea the scope/sources, sans this possible breakdown.

 

I suppose we can wonder about the other 25 or so...... and, if nothing can be found to elicit further study in those it will be a difficult blow for witnesses, but perhaps a boon to the Mythology....  I don't think anything will dispense with that.

Edited June 21, 2013 by apehuman

[Guest]

SS thanks for the reply, although I could use a little clarification.

 

 

Are you saying that all ten of your samples were also from the same samples/sources submitted to Sykes?  

 

Are you also saying that these same samples/sources were the same supplied to Ketchum?

 

I think I read Sykes only received about 35 or so....but I have no idea the scope/sources, sans this possible breakdown.

 

I suppose we can wonder about the other 25 or so...... and, if nothing can be found to elicit further study in those it will be a difficult blow for witnesses, but perhaps a boon to the Mythology....  I don't think anything will dispense with that.

AH,  My samples were no aligned with ketchum and sykes. (with 1 or 2 possible exceptions).  In my case people would find out i had the capabilities to run DNA samples in my lab, and would approach me .  i used to do it for free,  but it started to get out of hand,  people wanting to submit all sorts of samples they were "100% sure" were BF,  but not willing to cover costs of the tests.  and those I did run,  when the results came back,  the original submitters (not all of them)  would get pretty surly,  snotty , accusatory, and insulting.

 

 I thought i was doing them a favor, instead, I was killing their dreams, and was paying the price for doing so!

 

turns out this in not unusual,  in conversations with several of my collaborators/ co-authors I would ask em if they had ever encountered anyone wanting them to use their lab to do BF DNA.  3 others have had similar experiences,  each had run a dozen or more samples for free,  all had been able to Id the samples as something other than BF,  and all had made it policy to not do it anymore, because of the way they were treated by the sample submitters.  There has been a whole lot more purported BF samples run that is commonly believed.  But since they turn out negative, and it is such a smale sample number,  there is nothing publishable there.  So the only way I find out about it, is in a pub over a beer at one of our geek society scietific meetings.  , 

 

As for the sykes / Ketchum comparisons.  You are correct that they do not have complete overlap.  but what you will have is a series of samples tested by both individuals that will be dirrectly conflicting with each other. 

it will be up to each individual to deside how they want to embrace that conundrum!

[Guest]

SS thanks for the detailed response. In some ways I am relieved, hoping more coverage of different sources will have the intended effect.

 

Sorry about the behavior of enthusiasts, no one is immune to these often very emotional and belligerent wails.

 

I find that really interesting actually. The first few first few years, I took that behavior personally (my fault, or theirs..)  now, six years later and with more attention to the bigger picture I find it even more interesting in that it is endemic, broader and deeper than I imagined or experienced....and historic too........like religion in many ways...  and with similar problems of proof!  

 

I am also sorry you don't do any of this (especially for free!) anymore, but hope your continued eye on the community/problem will end up being worth your time.  I feel my best opportunity is now past, not b/c the BFs aren't there, but b/c I have reached the end of time/money and faith I can make any difference....even with accurate/valid data... yeah, that is an interesting shift for me, in that I increasingly feel this won't be solved anytime soon,  the reasons as broad and deep as the opinions....and, not interested in hanging around such a negative environment much longer.

 

I hope Dr. Sykes contribution will rise to real interest among those like yourself and bring a willingness to handle more samples....maybe with a pre-printed FAQ and demand for respect...hahah!

 

thanks again

Edited June 21, 2013 by apehuman

[Cotter]

If we are to believe that Sykes has tested the samples, and they are ID'd, why is he still heading to the PNW?

 

What kind of book/documentary is he putting together?

 

There have been posts suggesting he is now a proponent.

 

Something isn't adding up here.

[Guest]

there are updates in the Oxford thread, it sounded as though he has returned to the UK.....    and my take was somewhat positive too.

[Cotter]

Yeah, I've been keeping an eye on that thread as well.

I've no doubt that some of his findings contradict Ketchum's.  But if they ALL were known animals, I'd of figured he would have packed up long ago.

 

That's just me....not understanding why a world class geneticist would waste his time writing a book about deluded bigfooters......perhaps there's an explanation that is escaping me.

[TimB]

What questions would you like me to answer answer Tim, obviously i am not understanding, can you lay them out for me?

 

I appologize, i should never have commented on sykes results.  That is for him to reveal, as I understand it on a documentary on BBC,  channel 4?  october 18? (i'm working off of memory there, so can't 100% garantee date and channel

 

 

No appologies necessary- just look for the numbers- the questions are right behind them.  

 

You must be a PRETTY important guy to have that kind of hidden knowledge.  Yay!

[Guest]

 

I appologize, i should never have commented on sykes results.  That is for him to reveal, as I understand it on a documentary on BBC,  channel 4?  october 18? (i'm working off of memory there, so can't 100% garantee date and channel

 

Hey SS - I think Cotter's question got lost in some of the back and forth, are you privy to the Sykes results?

 

Alternatively, was your 'spoiler' comment instead biased by your own negative experiences with testing purported BF samples?

 

Ta,

FG

[Guest]

 

What questions would you like me to answer answer Tim, obviously i am not understanding, can you lay them out for me?

 

I appologize, i should never have commented on sykes results.  That is for him to reveal, as I understand it on a documentary on BBC,  channel 4?  october 18? (i'm working off of memory there, so can't 100% garantee date and channel

 

 

No appologies necessary- just look for the numbers- the questions are right behind them.  

 

You must be a PRETTY important guy to have that kind of hidden knowledge.  Yay!

 

Please elucidate?  which numbers are you speaking of?  i am more than willing to answer your questions,  I would just like to know which questions you would like me to answer!

[bipedalist]

Yeah, I've been keeping an eye on that thread as well.

I've no doubt that some of his findings contradict Ketchum's.  But if they ALL were known animals, I'd of figured he would have packed up long ago.

 

That's just me....not understanding why a world class geneticist would waste his time writing a book about deluded bigfooters......perhaps there's an explanation that is escaping me.

 

 

He's making a documentary.  Chances are his visits have more to do with filmography than DNA. 

[Cotter]

^Sure, I can understand that.

BUT, if he tested some DNA, and NONE of it has come back unknown primate, why waste the time making a documentary?  Just to show the world that these 'crazy' bigfooters are out there bringing in yak and raccoon hair and claiming it was BF?
 

[Guest]

Ok, i guess some stuff got lost or was not posted here.  Sykes was in california in early June, along with  BBC film crew.  He met with Smeja near the sierra Kill site, and was up in Grass Valley filming as well.  The documentary will be shown on BBC on October 18th I believe,  channel 4?  (I'm working off of memory on the channel and date,  but i believe that is accurate). Smeja knows the results of the tests on his boots and the Sierra steak.  you will have to ask him if you want to know befiore the show comes out!

He has been back in the UK for at least a few weeks now.

 

Scientifically,  there is value in examining samples that are purportedly BF.  If they turn out to show unidentified Ape,  that of course is huge.  But even if the results were an ID of a known animal,  It would directly contradict some of the most "believable" BF stories out there,  assuming the samples were tied to BF.  Smeja story and the tissue and boots samples for instance.

 

Don't forget Sykes is a best selling Author.  Any book he writes makes money for him, and his publisher.  And a documentary  on BF ,  well that has a huge built in market allready!

Sykes model for his books is essentially a detective story.  first he lays out the Mystery, then he uses scientific inquiry and data to provide the conclusions.  that fits BF perfectly,  makes for great TV,  doesn't matter that the results say no BF,  it gets huge ratings, and sets up future conflict!