The Ketchum Report (Continued)

[Guest Theagenes]

... and Speaking of the Sasquatch Genome Project

Cryptomundo, opening page,

a brief evaluation of the Bf Research Community http://www.cryptomundo.com/

On Cryptomundo: Sasquatch Genome Project Q & A by Dr. Ketchum (today)

http://www.cryptomun...me-project-q-a/

(no doubt, y'all have seen this?)

Yes, it's more nonsense. As I've outlined both here and on the JREF board, her 15,000 ya hypothesis is based on a misunderstanding of the origins of Haplogroup H. Since we know she and her shills are reading this, I challenge MK to explain her reasoning behind this hypothesis.

Additionally, the material on H. heidelbergensis and the unknown African hominin appear to have been cribbed from some of the posts in this very thread back in December and January.

[Guest Theagenes]

This passage really says it all. She doesn't even know what the word "hominin" means. She's just saying words at this point.

The paternal lineage found in the nuclear DNA of Sasquatch suggests a distantly related hominin that evolved separately from humans, apes and other primates but evolved to the point where it could interbred with humans.

[bipedalist]

Yes, it's more nonsense. As I've outlined both here and on the JREF board, her 15,000 ya hypothesis is based on a misunderstanding of the origins of Haplogroup H. Since we know she and her shills are reading this, I challenge MK to explain her reasoning behind this hypothesis.

Additionally, the material on H. heidelbergensis and the unknown African hominin appear to have been cribbed from some of the posts in this very thread back in December and January.

Shocking and surprising,........

NOT

[Guest]

http://www.illumina....te_Q-Scores.pdf

Q scores are used to measure base calling accuracy, one of the most common metrics for assessing sequencing data quality. Low Q scores can lead to increased False-Positive Variant calls, eesaulting in inaccurate conclusions and higher costs for validation experiments.

Not sure how you couldn't find this it took me a whole 2 min to confirm and the PDF file was the top hit in google search for Q30 score

It shows that higher score better Data Quality. Which would indicate more pure.

Edited March 1, 2013 by CathMcmillan

[Guest]

This passage really says it all. She doesn't even know what the word "hominin" means. She's just saying words at this point.

The paternal lineage found in the nuclear DNA of Sasquatch suggests a distantly related hominin that evolved separately from humans, apes and other primates but evolved to the point where it could interbred with humans.

I'm not even a scientist and know that makes no sense at all! Something was distantly related, but evolved to the point where it could interbreed with humans?! How in the world did this woman even become a vet?

[Guest]

How is it not make sense. we know that Neanderthal interbred with modern man. That modern and Neanderthal were living side by side. It is possible we have been placing fossil records in wrong places I mean you look at some of them we go from looking human to looking ape then back to human than ape. Maybe we are identifying fossil records incorrect.

[Guest Scout1959]

I'm not even a scientist and know that makes no sense at all! Something was distantly related, but evolved to the point where it could interbreed with humans?! How in the world did this woman even become a vet?

Understanding evolution is not required to be a veterinarian, I'm not even certain if any classes on evolution outside of what might be covered in a basic biology class would be required. There is certainly no need for it on a technical basis.

Again, I think far too many posts on here are attacking Melba on a personal basis, and like it or not (and regardless of how often she posts) she is a member here and that is against forum rules. It's time for the mods here to enforce the rules across the board and stop allowing flagrant violations to continue. In all honesty the fact that she doesn't come here makes attacks on her more egregious as she does not have the opportunity to defend herself.

[Guest]

In all honesty the fact that she doesn't come here makes attacks on her more egregious as she does not have the opportunity to defend herself.

As a member I think she has the opportunity to post, and chooses not to.

The fact that she doesn't come here and respond makes her sound like a lurker rather than contributing member. (see below)

Personally I am so tired of the cat and mouse FB posts I want to scream. I have yet to tell one personal friend/contact this study is done b/c of the unanswered questions and bad reviews...still waiting for that confirming peer review... (sadly I told too many years ago...!)

It was almost tolerable during the pre-publish period..the last four years, but not anymore.

Now is the time to actively engage IMO and this forum has produced many valid questions about the study and conclusions that remain as questions, still.

(after note...using membership in the forum as a reason to be civil is funny in some ways, shouldn't we be civil even when discussing nonmembers? But also, it reminds me of the "conflict of interests" problem that can arise with attorneys...and back in the day an enterprising party to a pending suit might call every good lawyer in town telling their story, apparently looking for an advocate...but in effect really just trying to prevent their opponent from using any of those lawyers b/c of conflict of interests .... the ethics rules have been modified to circumvent this strategy in most jurisdictions... just a curiosity..lol)

Edited March 1, 2013 by apehuman

[Guest]

How is it not make sense. we know that Neanderthal interbred with modern man. That modern and Neanderthal were living side by side. It is possible we have been placing fossil records in wrong places I mean you look at some of them we go from looking human to looking ape then back to human than ape. Maybe we are identifying fossil records incorrect.

But she says that it was distantly related, and then evolved separately from humans and apes and other primates. Only species that are very closely related, such as neanderthals and humans, and only relatively recently separated, can interbreed. Something distantly related couldn't evolve separately on a different line and then interbreed with humans . Maybe scientists reading this can explain it better or correct me if I'm wrong.

Understanding evolution is not required to be a veterinarian, I'm not even certain if any classes on evolution outside of what might be covered in a basic biology class would be required. There is certainly no need for it on a technical basis.

Again, I think far too many posts on here are attacking Melba on a personal basis, and like it or not (and regardless of how often she posts) she is a member here and that is against forum rules. It's time for the mods here to enforce the rules across the board and stop allowing flagrant violations to continue. In all honesty the fact that she doesn't come here makes attacks on her more egregious as she does not have the opportunity to defend herself.

I think an understanding of evolution would kind of been helpful in writing her paper though. And it wasn't so much a personal attack as me being genuinely appalled that someone who is in her field seems to have such limited understanding of evolutionary process. Edited March 1, 2013 by barncat

[Guest]

But she says that it was distantly related, and then evolved separately from humans and apes and other primates. Only species that are very closely related, such as neanderthals and humans, and only relatively recently separated, can interbreed. Something distantly related couldn't evolve separately on a different line and then interbreed with humans . Maybe scientists reading this can explain it better or correct me if I'm wrong.

Oh I think she knows what it means

So, roughly speaking, a Hominin is what we used to call a Hominid; a creature that paleoanthropologists have agreed is human or a human ancestor. These include all of the Homo species (Homo sapiens, H. ergaster, H. rudolfensis), all of the Australopithecines (Australopithecus africanus, A. boisei, etc.) and other ancient forms like Paranthropus andArdipithecus.

Maybe her wording was a bit off since we refer to our selves as "Human" she should have said Modern Human then. But the way I read it was she was refering it is a Human ancestor that took a different evolutionary path than modern human did. That is how I read that.

Edited March 1, 2013 by CathMcmillan

[Guest]

^ you are mentioned at about 14 minutes.

Saw that eventually...I'm having trouble with streaming content right now...dang cheap-butt landlord thinks apartment complexes can offer "free internet access" with a single "home account" and a bunch of civilian-grade wi-fi routers...

MK has not put out the terrabytes of data - but less than 0.1% of the genome (she published about 3 million bp of a presumed genome size of 3 billion). There is no indication she will publish more with this current manuscript - we will have to pony up another $30 for the next installment! We can only analyze that data that we have access to (and purchased).

So they have no basis for trashing the study, as they cannot have gotten to or analyzed the data yet.

That is the point.

Noone should be dunning the study results unless they can demonstrate the following:

1) They have access to the full genetic dataset.

2) They either have credentials sufficient to analyze that data or have access to willing other parties who do.

3) They have completed a full technical analysis of the data and produced a formal report (with peer review).

Yeah - and Mulder? What did they say - that hasn't been said here - by GenesRus, Ridgerunner or Theagenes? Yeah - there was a bit of "laughing at us" - but we do that to ourselves.

At this point, however, with an actual paper on proffer, we must switch to strictly limited comments based on the data, not her paper-writing skills or how she handles her PR.

The data is all at this point. If they have not done what I said above, they have no right to trash the study.

I'm not sure why we expect others to treat us better than we treat ourselves and each other??

Because they're supposed to be professional scientists (or ones in training) and they have a duty to objectivity and their own rules of operation to do things in a properly objective, scientific manner rather than engage in base mockery.

[Martin]

Cath McMillan

As I understand it, In laymans terms, Ketchum is saying indirectly that Smeja bred with a black bear and created bigfoot 15,000 years ago.

[Guest DWA]

^^^As plausible as Sierra Steaks, if one only asks me.

[Guest]

@Theagenes: you should collect all your analysis and write a white paper critique.

[Guest]

Maybe her wording was a bit off since we refer to our selves as "Human" she should have said Modern Human then. But the way I read it was she was refering it is a Human ancestor that took a different evolutionary path than modern human did. That is how I read that.

That may be how you read that, to try to make sense of it. However Ketchum clearly states:

"The paternal lineage found in the nuclear DNA of Sasquatch suggests a distantly related hominin that evolved separately from humans, apes and other primates but evolved to the point where it could interbred with humans."

Anything evolving separately from apes and primates *cannot* be a hominin.