The Ketchum Report (Continued)

[TimB]

I think the frantic fanaticism that infects the arguments against Dr. Ketchum make those same arguments suspect. The witnesses to the sample distribution are suspect at best and that makes it hard to put any certainty in the arguments made against Dr. Ketchum's report as is it to put certainty in Dr. Ketchum's unsubstantiated claims. It hasn't been proven- it hasn't been found false. Both sides have holes in their arguments and I refuse to leap over those holes on the word of the players involved. It is simply unproven and I won't be bullied into saying otherwise.

[Guest thermalman]

So say within 5 years from now Melba still hasn't released the full data but still claims she has proven sasquatch is a walking, talking entity, yet still can't release the full data(for what ever excuse) that's all good for you? 10 years, 20 years, what is it and why would you give her that much leeway when any other scientist publishing a manuscript of this importants not be given the same pass on withholding this information?

We've been dealing with the PGF for the past 45 years and it hasn't been good enough for the skeptics and trolls, so it doesn't really matter when MK releases her data. The same individuals will likely disbelieve and attack her the same way. Just another witch hunt that allows skeptics and trolls to jump from one band wagon over to the other.

Edited March 9, 2013 by thermalman

[Guest]

I think the frantic fanaticism that infects the arguments against Dr. Ketchum make those same arguments suspect.

And how about the QUALIFIED SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS of her consensus sequence data.

Does that mean nothing?

[bipedalist]

You know I really wanted to believe in this Sasquatch study by Ketchum. But you know what, those that purchased it, and have a critical eye to the science behind it.....telling me they would like a refund tells me that somebody fumbled the football on the five yard line..... and probably didn't have a good grasp of it at the 30.

She knows that, I know that, so where is this gonna end...... legendary (but not epic).

Edited March 9, 2013 by bipedalist

[Guest]

I think the frantic fanaticism that infects the arguments against Dr. Ketchum make those same arguments suspect. The witnesses to the sample distribution are suspect at best and that makes it hard to put any certainty in the arguments made against Dr. Ketchum's report as is it to put certainty in Dr. Ketchum's unsubstantiated claims. It hasn't been proven- it hasn't been found false. Both sides have holes in their arguments and I refuse to leap over those holes on the word of the players involved. It is simply unproven and I won't be bullied into saying otherwise.

there is a phrase in science that i believe applies to ketchum's work: "not even wrong"

"Not even wrong refers to any statement, argument or explanation that can be neither correct nor incorrect, because it fails to meet the criteria by which correctness and incorrectness are determined. The phrase implies that not only is someone not making a valid point in a discussion, but they don't even understand the nature of the discussion itself, or the things that need to be understood in order to participate."

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

[Guest thermalman]

And how about the QUALIFIED SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS of her consensus sequence data.

Does that mean nothing?

Not on the 1% that's been released. On full disclosure of the full 100%, yes it would mean something. Basically, the current 1% release is akin to a cosmetic overlay, lacking full details of the total report.

Edited March 9, 2013 by thermalman

[Guest Tyler H]

@Tyler

• "from the evidence that Melba hand-picked to release, (and perhaps the subsequent, insightful critiques that credentialed people have made available to us), what opinion/stance do you think people should be allowed to form?
  
• how long should people reasonably have to wait for "all the data" before they are allowed to form opinions on the ONLY data that she has released? Or, in the continued absence of said data, at what point can they form an opinion on the fact that she has not released more data?"
  

This is my answer.........again,

I've stated before in earlier posts, until the total raw data is released, and we have 100% of the results in hand, it's all speculation. Rome wasn't built overnight, so it's on her time. I'm not Melba, so I can't answer for her. We wait as long as we have to, until she decides to release the other 99% of the data. How hard is that to comprehend?

You're acting like collection agency associate, and this is the third time I've answered the same questions. So no use you trying to bully your way for an answer, that only you want to hear and approve of.

Alright, so "as long as we have to" is your answer.

Got it.

So, 10 years from now, if Melba is still making claims, and still has not released the rest of her data, you think people should still be biting their tongues, and witholding any opinions. Good, got it - just wanted it on record. Now that I understand your stance, I can officially say I disagree, and we don't see eye to eye, and I just don't think that is reasonable.

Man, if anyone ever owed you money, I'm not sure how you would collect it.

We've been dealing with the PGF for the past 45 years and it hasn't been good enough for the skeptics and trolls, so it doesn't really matter when MK releases her data. The same individuals will likely disbelieve and attack her the same way. Just another witch hunt that allows skeptics and trolls to jump from one band wagon over to the other.

DIfference is that the PGF put all their cards on the table, they didn't say "oh, if you don't believe this bit of film/data, just wait, I have MUCH better stuff"... If they had, people would have tired of it long ago.

there is a phrase in science that i believe applies to ketchum's work: "not even wrong"

"Not even wrong refers to any statement, argument or explanation that can be neither correct nor incorrect, because it fails to meet the criteria by which correctness and incorrectness are determined. The phrase implies that not only is someone not making a valid point in a discussion, but they don't even understand the nature of the discussion itself, or the things that need to be understood in order to participate."

http://rationalwiki..../Not_even_wrong

Slappy - you made my day! I love learning words and phrases like this. And it's so applicable so many times around here.

Not on the 1% that's been released. On full disclosure of the full 100%, yes it would mean something. Basically, the current 1% release is akin to a cosmetic overlay, lacking full details of the total report.

And yet, it was hand chosen as the cream of her crop to be released: "here's my report everyone, and I charged an infinite exponential amount more than other scientific papers do (namely $0). But please don't judge me or my data or my conclusions or my science by this report, or by the data I have included."

Get real TMan. I know you are capable of better logic than this. In what aspect of the world that we live in, does this approach fly?

[bipedalist]

Not on the 1% that's been released. On full disclosure of the full 100%, yes it would mean something. Basically, the current 1% release is akin to a cosmetic overlay, lacking full details of the total report.

Cosmetic overlay is not a critical fault, this is all about cosmetic foundation however!

Which do you think should have come first?!

Melba was beat down so bad during this project,when she started it,she was 5'6" tall, now she is 5'2"

Yep, that creaky cosmetic foundation swallowed her up.

[Guest]

T-Man,

I am just very confused. You are stating above that we should wait basically "forever" if we have to before we are allowed to pass judgement on Melba's study, yet she is taking exactly the opposite approach that "Sasquatch must be protected now". By this she is stating categorgically that her paper definitively proves that Sasquatch is real.

Let me put this in red MS Comic Sans to illustrate my point.

She is stating categorgically that her paper definitively proves that Sasquatch is a real living existing species.

This and this alone clears the way for any analysis of the data in her paper. We do not have to wait a single minute for more data. The analysis of that data can start right now and as you can see it has.

If what you are suggesting T-Man was applied to the judical system nobody would ever get convicted because the defense would be allowed to postpone the trial forever on the claims that "we must wait until all the evidence is in".

Cleary this is not how science works TM. If it does I would suggest finding a single example where the "wait and see forever" methodology was applied to a new discovery.

Edited March 9, 2013 by BipedalCurious

[Guest thermalman]

@ BC "If what you are suggesting T-Man was applied to the judical system nobody would ever get convicted because the defense would be allowed to postpone the trial forever on the claims that "we must wait until all the evidence is in".

You are correct. But this is not a court of law. More along the lines of "a court of public opinion", which by nature and precedence, has no limitiations. Take the PGF as an example.....45 years and counting. Just because some people don't like MK's timeline, doesn't mean she has to be bullied into an answer when others feel they need one. I, and many others, are prepared to wait until she is ready for her release on her terms.

Cosmetic overlay is not a critical fault, this is all about cosmetic foundation however!

Which do you think should have come first?!

I'm not saying what MK has done, was in proper order. The reality is, it's done her way and now we wait. She has full control of her data and we will just have to wait until she's ready to release the full 100%. It's not life or death, just another facet of people's lives, that is 100% self inflicted by those who are upset about it. How we deal with it, is not MK's problem. There is nothing we can do about it by screaming at, demanding of, or nitpicking about how MK should do as how WE feel it should have been done.

@TH

"So, 10 years from now, if Melba is still making claims, and still has not released the rest of her data, you think people should still be biting their tongues, and witholding any opinions. Good, got it - just wanted it on record. Now that I understand your stance, I can officially say I disagree, and we don't see eye to eye, and I just don't think that is reasonable."

In reality, our opinion means very little when someone else is holding all the cards. Those are the facts. Roll with it. We have no vested interest.

@TH

"Man, if anyone ever owed you money, I'm not sure how you would collect it."

Apples and oranges my friend. Not even related to the MK issue.

@TH

"DIfference is that the PGF put all their cards on the table, they didn't say "oh, if you don't believe this bit of film/data, just wait, I have MUCH better stuff"... If they had, people would have tired of it long ago."

And has proved nothing, according to the hardcore skeptics, denouncers and trolls. MK likely knows that and is willing to wait it out, for reasons only known to her.

@TH

"And yet, it was hand chosen as the cream of her crop to be released: "here's my report everyone, and I charged an infinite exponential amount more than other scientific papers do (namely $0). But please don't judge me or my data or my conclusions or my science by this report, or by the data I have included."

Get real TMan. I know you are capable of better logic than this. In what aspect of the world that we live in, does this approach fly?"

Its MK's venture and you chose to buy into it. I chose not to. That is my logic.

Edited March 9, 2013 by thermalman

[Guest]

shoot again, this time try and put some powder in first.

embarassing when you get caught huh!

[southernyahoo]

Science is constantly amending what it concludes to be the truth, and the judical system gets it wrong on occasion too. Dr. Ketchum is convinced by her data, and people would consider it a red flag if she "wasn't" actively seeking protection of sasquatch. They'd say, she obviously doesn't believe in her own data or she'd be doing this or the other.....etc. The handling of "human" data would be different from a new animal............that's my answer and I'm sticking to it. I just hope someone like Sykes or Disotell can get the data on the Y chromosome because that is the center piece of this whole project and percipitated the hypothesis of sasquatch as a hybrid human in the first place. If it's not there then we are simply expanding the known morphology of human samples or, over 100 samples got severly contaminated.

Does anyone know what Fahrenbach encountered in his results mentioned below? hmmmmmmmmmmmm.

http://www.bfro.net/REF/THEORIES/WHF/dnatests.htm

Re: Interim Statement on the Blue Mountain / Ohio Hair.

After lengthy deliberation, we (W. H. Fahrenbach, J. A. Poe, and P. Fuerst), co-authors of the intended article on the Eastern Washington hair found in August, 1995, have decided to withhold submission of the manuscript of the analysis until more DNA from tissue, preferably with attached hair, is obtained. Our studies have not yielded a sequenced mitochondrial gene fragment to determine the phylogenetic affiliation of the creature. The ambiguous results at the present time can, on the one hand, generate misplaced enthusiasm and be quoted as "proof", or, on the other hand, can be used by the opposite camp to criticize and denigrate the results unfairly.

This decision emphasizes the critical need to obtain tissue samples rather than hair alone. Such should be fresh blood or possibly minimal shreds of torn skin caught on some obstruction. Feces are not suitable at the present time. If such suggestive remains are detected, they should be collected without contact by human hands directly into a vial containing 70% alcohol and forwarded to one of the undersigned investigators (hair to WHF).

[bipedalist]

Molecular dna testing of feces that is fresh and properly stored is within the realm now...... it would just not be a cheap endeavor and would be rather 'messy' to put it bluntly.

[Guest Tyler H]

There is nothing we can do about it by screaming at, demanding of, or nitpicking about how MK should do as how WE feel it should have been done.

@TH

"So, 10 years from now, if Melba is still making claims, and still has not released the rest of her data, you think people should still be biting their tongues, and witholding any opinions. Good, got it - just wanted it on record. Now that I understand your stance, I can officially say I disagree, and we don't see eye to eye, and I just don't think that is reasonable."

In reality, our opinion means very little when someone else is holding all the cards. Those are the facts. Roll with it. We have no vested interest.

@TH

"And yet, it was hand chosen as the cream of her crop to be released: "here's my report everyone, and I charged an infinite exponential amount more than other scientific papers do (namely $0). But please don't judge me or my data or my conclusions or my science by this report, or by the data I have included."

Get real TMan. I know you are capable of better logic than this. In what aspect of the world that we live in, does this approach fly?"

Its MK's venture and you chose to buy into it. I chose not to. That is my logic.

" nothing we can do about it by screaming at, demanding of, or nitpicking about how MK should do as how WE feel it should have been done."

I've never asked if there is anything we can do about it. I've asked if you agree with it, and why you take issue with those of us who do not agree with it. I guess people should just accept government oppression as well... And accept that people don't believe in squatch. I mean, why discuss it, or try to change it, or try to have a voice?

"We have no vested interest."

I do have a vested interest - something I am convinced of is beeing turned into even worse of a mockery. I think many people here feel the same.

"Its MK's venture and you chose to buy into it. I chose not to. That is my logic."

I never chose to buy into it... I've fought it tooth and nail... and since when have you chosen NOT to buy into it? Are we suddenly on the same side here? ...I feel like the red guy with horns, at the end of this commercial: "How are you not getting this? ...Is there something going on?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiBtItdXcPI

Edited March 9, 2013 by Tyler H

[Guest mitchw]

Whether any arguments can be settled on this board is inconsequential compared to what is persuasive to the wider scientific and popular community. In this regard, at least the Ketchum paper was almost immediately drawn and quartered upon its release by the same people that wished for it to have been solid and transparent work.