Guest Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 What would happen to the body if it had fully "human" mtDNA? The DNA analysis of any body would come long after its' initial scientific evaluation. If it turned out to be 100% human, well I imagine it would need to be dealt with as a human body. But I think it being classified as a normal human is not likely. I would not be surprised if the mtDNA did show up as human! My issue, as it always has been, is the nuDNA - it that it does not make biological sense with the unknown sequences, and there is no evidence for the naming of a new species Homo sapien cognatus based on it. If we have a body, and analysis of the dna shows up as human mitochondrial dna, I am fine with that. If the nuDNA shows up as near human, I am ok with that. If the nuDNA shows up as bear, I won't be going back into the woods again! I can deal with near human hybrids but not bear -human hybrids - that just scares the heck out of me! If the nuDNA shows up as an exact match to MK's sequence, I will send her a dozen roses with my profound apologies. But the science will need to be done correctly and be repeated. I know people will say that in my previous posts I have jumped to conclusions because I did not repeat her experiments. I did do some re-analysis of her data, and it did not hold up. So have others on this forum. No one has offered any proof of repeating her analysis with the data she has published and coming to the same conclusion. MKs external scientists are also not repeating the experiments - they too are just re-evaluating MKs data. Does science demand a body? Interesting question. I say no, because science does not believe in Bigfoot, and would happily proceed on without this discovery. But does the Bigfoot community need a body? The only reason I can think of is so that it will be accepted by science or the scientific community. I know many people who have been lucky enough to have had an encounter want this species identified to prove what they experienced was real. I understand that. Others don't need this. And it is unlikely that science will accept this creature without better proof than what has been provided so far, in way or DNA evidence or images. If everyone would release there data, videos, photos, that everyone is claiming to have this might be sufficient. Melba Ketchum, release all of your raw data to competent labs. Ericson Project, release those full HD videos of Matilda (yes, the ones that shows her face)! Anyone else, stop hogging your results. For the sake of Bigfoot!!! Rick Dyer, put it out there if you have it! But don't kill a Bigfoot in the name of science! Personally, some part of me wants Bigfoot to remain undiscovered, remain in the twilight. I don't see it's discovery as benefiting them - it will just bring a lot of yahoos into the forest. I doubt "managed care" by any organization will do more good than harm. For myself, it is the quest that I like - once it is discovered, the fun part is over. More food for thought! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Who are these competitors J sasq doe is talking about? I didn't realize Ketchum was in a competition with some other group or people. You mean you didn't know this community has competing hypotheses about what bigfoot is and that the prokill no kill debate has raged for as long as the PGF has existed at least? So long as it is not proven human, people can cling to the "bigfoot is animal theory" and call for a body. Perhaps bigfoot is a Manimal, in which case neither is entirely accurate, and bigfoot would be entirely unacceptable to any prevailing scientific theory as an extant breeding population of primates. Anything that would stand on the fence "would" get shot down literally, metaphoricly and philosophicly in spite of it's reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I don't have proof because it is not my allegation. It is your claim, and the responsibility for proof is yours. The outcome of this study has not been reached by any stretch of your imagination. The outcome of PGF is still going on. Surely you are not that naive as to think this is over already, before even one acknowledged expert has had a chance to get the data and replicate the results? Maybe it's just wishful thinking on your part? If the faint-hearted are going to wither in their beliefs simply because of an online onslaught by Ketchum's competitors, then that is their choice, and be sure to give them a warm welcome when they get there. Plus plus .. your post is Better said than the post I am working on.... The competition is very fierce .... But the presentation is very one sided.... It makes me wonder ......? Is the bad competition the vocal one or the loudest one.... My vote is the loudest is the bad .... Not baddest There will be a better time for the Ketchum basking after the results are in.... IMHO ..... The bashing is doing irreparable harm to the Bigfoot community I'm not the faint of heart ... But enough is enough IMHO BTW, I will be there til the bitter end .. Or the Bigfoot victory Give her a chance to prove the Science is good.... This should be proven Scientifically .... Not arguing in a chat room (thread). Kinda like the dark ages ... But this ain't about donkeys teeth .. It's about proving Sasquatch ... Without a body... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Ah, Melba was paid quite handsomely. She sure didn't do it for free. I don't believe she did it out of the goodness of her heart. She didn't do it without putting her future in genetics on the line either did she? Even Sykes had intrepidation about getting into these samples, and he would have that no matter how much he was getting paid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Plus plus .. your post is Better said than the post I am working on.... The competition is very fierce .... But the presentation is very one sided.... It makes me wonder ......? Is the bad competition the vocal one or the loudest one.... My vote is the loudest is the bad .... Not baddest There will be a better time for the Ketchum basking after the results are in.... IMHO ..... The bashing is doing irreparable harm to the Bigfoot community I'm not the faint of heart ... But enough is enough IMHO BTW, I will be there til the bitter end .. Or the Bigfoot victory Give her a chance to prove the Science is good.... This should be proven Scientifically .... Not arguing in a chat room (thread). Kinda like the dark ages ... But this ain't about donkeys teeth .. It's about proving Sasquatch ... Without a body... I will throw in bottle of champagne too (along with the roses) if it proves true! I wish the data was better, but its not. But hey, let it be proven! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 So now that Ketchum's paper turned out to be a shoddy mess its time to blame the "ape" camp for her problems. Not buying that either. And if Melba's reputation has been tarnished she did that to herself. She's responsible for her behavior and the paper she published. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 The DNA analysis of any body would come long after its' initial scientific evaluation. If it turned out to be 100% human, well I imagine it would need to be dealt with as a human body. But I think it being classified as a normal human is not likely. I would not be surprised if the mtDNA did show up as human! My issue, as it always has been, is the nuDNA - it that it does not make biological sense with the unknown sequences, and there is no evidence for the naming of a new species Homo sapien cognatus based on it. If we have a body, and analysis of the dna shows up as human mitochondrial dna, I am fine with that. If the nuDNA shows up as near human, I am ok with that. If the nuDNA shows up as bear, I won't be going back into the woods again! I can deal with near human hybrids but not bear -human hybrids - that just scares the heck out of me! If the nuDNA shows up as an exact match to MK's sequence, I will send her a dozen roses with my profound apologies. But the science will need to be done correctly and be repeated. I know people will say that in my previous posts I have jumped to conclusions because I did not repeat her experiments. I did do some re-analysis of her data, and it did not hold up. So have others on this forum. No one has offered any proof of repeating her analysis with the data she has published and coming to the same conclusion. MKs external scientists are also not repeating the experiments - they too are just re-evaluating MKs data. Does science demand a body? Interesting question. I say no, because science does not believe in Bigfoot, and would happily proceed on without this discovery. But does the Bigfoot community need a body? The only reason I can think of is so that it will be accepted by science or the scientific community. I know many people who have been lucky enough to have had an encounter want this species identified to prove what they experienced was real. I understand that. Others don't need this. And it is unlikely that science will accept this creature without better proof than what has been provided so far, in way or DNA evidence or images. If everyone would release there data, videos, photos, that everyone is claiming to have this might be sufficient. Melba Ketchum, release all of your raw data to competent labs. Ericson Project, release those full HD videos of Matilda (yes, the ones that shows her face)! Anyone else, stop hogging your results. For the sake of Bigfoot!!! Rick Dyer, put it out there if you have it! But don't kill a Bigfoot in the name of science! Personally, some part of me wants Bigfoot to remain undiscovered, remain in the twilight. I don't see it's discovery as benefiting them - it will just bring a lot of yahoos into the forest. I doubt "managed care" by any organization will do more good than harm. For myself, it is the quest that I like - once it is discovered, the fun part is over. More food for thought! Just a few questions... If the specimen that was brought in from the woods did show human DNA 100%, wouldn't that open the door for charges of a homicide? Then there is the hybrid bear-human combination you mentioned. Why would you be so fearful about this, to the point, that you wouldn't go back in the woods? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oonjerah Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Lemme take a wild guess: a hybrid bear-human creature would be impossible in nature . . . far moreso than ape-human hybrids that have been hypothesized from time to time. If a hybrid bear-human could occur, it'd be unique and sterile. Would it be mad and attack bigfooters? Unknown. Conclusion: RR was joking. The thread does need a bit of humor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Ridgerunner said: I will throw in bottle of champagne too (along with the roses) if it proves true! I wish the data was better, but its not. But hey, let it be proven! I completely agree. Treadstone asked: If the specimen that was brought in from the woods did show human DNA 100%, wouldn't that open the door for charges of a homicide? Short answer - No. And I will bet my life on it. Why? Because regardless of how close to human it is - it is not human - or like us. If a person could be charged with Homicide for killing one, then the reverse would be true. It can not be given the same protections we are entitled to under the law - yet not be responsible for the same laws - and/or unless it fully understands our language and lives within our societal norms. Chimpanzees are very close to humans - but if you kill one you are not charged with Homicide. If you kill a bigfoot - you will be charged under some law created (most likely) by Fish and Wildlife - and/or various state or federal laws if it is afforded protected or endangered status. It wont be pretty, but it won't be homicide or murder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 (edited) Bigfootology has this post today on their facebook page.... from the nocturnal primate biologist.... and the video she is referring to is the one posted here and BE by the grad students. Hi All - this is Anna Nekaris - I don't post here often but this is an important video about the Melba Ketchum paper - I have said I would write a statement about all that is wrong with the paper, as there is not much that is right, but this nice bearded guy from New Zealand says it all. If you ignore the irritating people laughing and taking the ****, he is spot on with EVERYTHING...it is very thoughtful in fact. It is a shame they are actually so frivolous...as it might put you off. I actually fast forwarded to ten minutes in. He speaks relatively laymen. If you still have any questions about what BLAST or GenBank or over-representation of a chromosome or why it is relevant that we only have ever sequenced the genome of a panda, you can ask, as they are all certainly relevant aspects...and easy to explain....and the bearded chappy helps you along to explain why Melba and colleagues have got it is oh-so-wrong...http://www.youtube.c...d&v=_LTjxSs3zzg Edited February 28, 2013 by apehuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I watched that video last night being discussed in the post by Apehuman. I didn't hear the bearded guy say anything that hadn't already been said here. It just felt worse coming from him... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tyler H Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 (edited) So who is it that would volunteer to take hundreds of submissions of samples, screen them all morphologicly, extract DNA where possible, and write a paper to be peer reviewed , demonstrating and proving without fail, the source of the samples without charging the submitters? Who were they gonna bill? Any of us that had contact with Wally could have asked him to fund what Melba asked him to fund. Answers would have been forthcoming MUCH faster, and with less obfuscation, and a lower price tag. Also, people had/have the option to have their samples tested at many labs, and retain control, and retain more of their samples, for about $500. Plus plus .. your post is Better said than the post I am working on.... The competition is very fierce .... But the presentation is very one sided.... It makes me wonder ......? Is the bad competition the vocal one or the loudest one.... My vote is the loudest is the bad .... Not baddest There will be a better time for the Ketchum basking after the results are in.... IMHO ..... The bashing is doing irreparable harm to the Bigfoot community I'm not the faint of heart ... But enough is enough IMHO BTW, I will be there til the bitter end .. Or the Bigfoot victory Give her a chance to prove the Science is good.... This should be proven Scientifically .... Not arguing in a chat room (thread). Kinda like the dark ages ... But this ain't about donkeys teeth .. It's about proving Sasquatch ... Without a body... "Plus plus .. your post is Better said than the post I am working on...." I wouldn't have believed that possible... but now that I have read yours - You're right! "Give her a chance to prove the Science is good...." Are you KIDDING me? Is that not EXACTLY what she has had the chance to do for the last 5 years? Is that not EXACTLY what I did when I invited her to share any compelling proof that showed her science was right, and mine was wrong, on Justin's samples? Is that not EXACTLY what the peer review process was supposed to have done? Is that not EXACTLY what this report was to have done, and what she only now claims is being done by yet another "independent team of scientists"? (The exact claim she has made for years.) Please define for me exactly how and when you will finally feel that she has been given enough of a chance to "prove the Science is good"? She didn't do it without putting her future in genetics on the line either did she? Even Sykes had intrepidation about getting into these samples, and he would have that no matter how much he was getting paid. OMG - she had NO reputation to put on the line. Unlike Sykes, this would MAKE her career. Sykes had a career to risk. Melba had bills to pay. It was win-win for her - make way more money, and possibly come out a Goddess. Or, make more money, and have die-hard loyalists still think you are a Goddess, and lose some customers that she was never going to have had anyways. (PS, assuming you meant "trepidation" - otherwise I'm mis-understanding your post.) Edited February 28, 2013 by Tyler H Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spurfoot Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 (edited) It is regrettable that the smug young scientists did not actually address the issues. To start with, the downspout specimen might well have been chewed on by a Sasquatch, but if the squatch had recently eaten a raccoon, a relative of the panda, then "panda" matches might have appeared. Nonetheless, the same chr 11 assembly was also obtained from two other specimens. This is not to say the chr. 11 assembly was correct. The Ketchum team should have used Paabo/Reich/Green techniques to deal with possible massive contamination by other species. That is probably not the fault of the respected laboratories that did the measurements. Instead it was the fault of Ketchum for not verifying that an algorithmically adequate method was used to generate the contigs. In any case, Ketchum should also be faulted for not publishing all the chromosomes and for not specifying the algorithmic method of assembly, nor taking into account that assembly against the existing chr. 11 template might not have been adequate. The smug postdocs in the video should be faulted for deliberately ignoring the fact that Ketchum only published the 11 and X assemblies. Even worse, they can be criticized for not taking doing the measurements themselves in view of the fact that Sasquatch evidence is abundant (although DNA evidence is not abundant). The postdocs should have been constructive by specifying the correct way to do the analysis (in their view). Additional faults of the Ketchum paper are that longer fragments should have been used. The Illumina machine does not generate as long "reads" as does the Oxford technique. Presumably, Sykes will take into account all these issues and more. The various Texas institutions that generated the raw data could presumably make those data available to someone familiar with alternative contig assembly techniques. There is probably nothing wrong with the raw data. It only needs to be supervised by the correct scientist instead of relying upon the Illumina default assembly. Edited February 28, 2013 by spurfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 @ apehuman: the video with the biologist glee club. I watched it past the intros to the first few opening lines where the entire subject was glibly and gleefully ridiculed and the study was completely mischaracterized. That's your mainstream science right there. They are completely close-minded and are utterly ignorant of the details on the subject. They have all have been taught to ridicule it from the outset. They are the products of the education and media they've been exposed to. We live in a time where the group mock and snickering is in vogue. Let's that for humanity's sake that this faaaaaaad passes. I like popcorn guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts