Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Its easy to see that people in here like to lump people who question stuff as. Lets see we have the RD supporters, Ketchum Supporters. But if we are just people who want to wait for more information that would mean we want to see more evidence. But it seems if we question the Sierra Kill information its ohhh well your wrong. Shrugs I have agreed many times that Ketchum should release the data. I agree the paper needed to be better. But I am not willing to say she doesn't know anything about DNA since she has worked in it as a living unlike some people. I also don't believe like some she "stole" the money she was given. I don't know the contract neither do you. Unless its been posted someplace for everyone to read we don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest crabshack Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I'm tired of a flawed theory being insisted openly as fact. I have a thought, nothing survived the known mass extinction, so anything living now cannot in anyway be compared or related to the fossil record other than a similar design of purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TwilightZone Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 What I see happening with pretty much every Bigfoot claim that comes along is like a sideshow at the circus. There's a barker claiming to have wondrous things inside the tent that you can't see. He shows a tiny preview to whip the crowd into a frenzy. He blusters on and on about the oddities lurking behind the flap. After a suitable delay in order to maximize curiosity, he sells you a ticket... So I agree Cath, let everyone with a claim put the cards on the table! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 (edited) Cath said: Look I am just saying you all want to poke holes in Melba's stuff yet you are fully accepting Justin story and all. Her study has more samples than Just Justins. It has several others. Yes, and based on what we know about how Melba handled things with Justins sample - that makes me wonder about all the others. How many other submitters did not submit their own DNA to have it compared to the sample they submitted? You are also assuming I accept every bit of Justin's story -- I wouldn't do that if I were you. You forget something very important here. Justin is not responsible for the work Melba did - nor is anyone else. That is on Melba. The criticisms are not out of line. Again you all can pick it apart but i hope to see you picking apart the Sierra Kill process as well then. Honestly, I'm not sure which part you are discussing. Are you talking about the shooting, the sample collection or the Trent DNA analysis? To be quite honest - I don't have a problem with any of those things. The sample collected is what it is - and that's that. Not sure what you want me and others to pick apart... I trust the work of the Trent Lab. They have a fine reputation. Edited to add: But, I should probably say - Maybe the Sierra Kills stuff should stay in that thread... So people don't have to run between two threads. But if we are just people who want to wait for more information that would mean we want to see more evidence. Yes, but more information is not yet on the horizon. Melba is withholding the Raw Data. So.... It is what it is... And people can only discuss what has been released. Edited March 1, 2013 by Melissa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I'm tired of a flawed theory being insisted openly as fact. I have a thought, nothing survived the known mass extinction, so anything living now cannot in anyway be compared or related to the fossil record other than a similar design of purpose. The genetic record would not agree with that "thought". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 @Melissa, Scott Carpenter gave DNA samples to her he says he did, Paul P as well. I am not sure why Justin didn't or why she didn't ask for it. I see if she will answer that. I will ask her face book page tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 No Cath - People are questioning Melba's paper based on established scientific principles and methods. Those who disagree with her findings are not trying to change how science is done - so they can throw out her paper. Maybe her entire point is she's trying to destroy "established scientific principles and methods"? I think that would be my goal if I were in her shoes and met the resistance she claims. From what I can garner, most of the problem the community is having with Melba is she's not playing by the rules and the timelines everyone demands of her? I do fault Ketchum a little bit for (IMO) she's still trying how to best capitalize from her work. I don't know if it has to do with patents or what, but I think she's trying to insure herself an hefty bounty and financial security. It's the only reason I can see for the deflecting and stalling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Orygun Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 What I see happening with pretty much every Bigfoot claim that comes along is like a sideshow at the circus. There's a barker claiming to have wondrous things inside the tent that you can't see. He shows a tiny preview to whip the crowd into a frenzy. He blusters on and on about the oddities lurking behind the flap. After a suitable delay in order to maximize curiosity, he sells you a ticket... So I agree Cath, let everyone with a claim put the cards on the table! You could say that about the DNA people, the videographers and especially the habituators. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Delta Zu said: Maybe her entire point is she's trying to destroy "established scientific principles and methods"? I think that would be my goal if I were in her shoes and met the resistance she claims. Really, you would want to re-invent the wheel on the back of a paper about Bigfoot? I would say that is taking on way more than you can chew - or should even try.. Her work will get lost in the process then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 .................... I will ask her face book page tonight. .................... While you are asking questions would you consider asking her why she made up the story about the birthing of the DeNovo Journal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 @Melissa, Scott Carpenter gave DNA samples to her he says he did, Paul P as well. I am not sure why Justin didn't or why she didn't ask for it. I see if she will answer that. I will ask her face book page tonight. Cool Cath - I would love to hear what she has to say.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 (edited) I'm tired of a flawed theory being insisted openly as fact. I have a thought, nothing survived the known mass extinction, so anything living now cannot in anyway be compared or related to the fossil record other than a similar design of purpose. You should have proof of a flawed theory before posting. For example; the mass extinction. @ Melissa "Yes, and based on what we know about how Melba handled things with Justins sample - that makes me wonder about all the others. How many other submitters did not submit their own DNA to have it compared to the sample they submitted? You are also assuming I accept every bit of Justin's story -- I wouldn't do that if I were you. You forget something very important here. Justin is not responsible for the work Melba did - nor is anyone else. That is on Melba. The criticisms are not out of line." "Yes, but more information is not yet on the horizon. Melba is withholding the Raw Data. So.... It is what it is... And people can only discuss what has been released." So which is it? Are the critics out of line or not, based on what has been released? If no Raw Data has been released, how can it be criticized? Edited March 1, 2013 by thermalman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Maybe her entire point is she's trying to destroy "established scientific principles and methods"? I think that would be my goal if I were in her shoes and met the resistance she claims. From what I can garner, most of the problem the community is having with Melba is she's not playing by the rules and the timelines everyone demands of her? I do fault Ketchum a little bit for (IMO) she's still trying how to best capitalize from her work. I don't know if it has to do with patents or what, but I think she's trying to insure herself an hefty bounty and financial security. It's the only reason I can see for the deflecting and stalling. I totally agree that she is in it for the money. Thanks for pointing that out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Thermalman: So which is it? Are the critics out of line or not, based on what has been released? Maybe I am confused - but I think I already said what I think in the post you quoted. But, No, I don't think the criticism of Melba's work is out of line at all. People have questions - not just within the Bigfoot Community. Honestly I thought for sure Melba would release ALL the data when she published - but I guess she didn't... Question for the DNA knowledgeable -- could this Raw Data be considered proprietary information? Is that why she may not be releasing it? I'm trying to figure out a good reason why she wouldn't release all the data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 You should have proof of a flawed theory before posting. For example; the mass extinction. @ Melissa "Yes, and based on what we know about how Melba handled things with Justins sample - that makes me wonder about all the others. How many other submitters did not submit their own DNA to have it compared to the sample they submitted? You are also assuming I accept every bit of Justin's story -- I wouldn't do that if I were you. You forget something very important here. Justin is not responsible for the work Melba did - nor is anyone else. That is on Melba. The criticisms are not out of line." "Yes, but more information is not yet on the horizon. Melba is withholding the Raw Data. So.... It is what it is... And people can only discuss what has been released." So which is it? Are the critics out of line or not, based on what has been released? If no Raw Data has been released, how can it be criticized? We (perhaps I should say I) are/am not criticizing the raw data, just the conclusion drawn upon the data that has been presented. I will evaluate further data if it is presented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts