Guest Llawgoch Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 There are many things for which there is far less evidence than there is for sasquatch, and science accepts them. Name some of these as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted September 26, 2013 Share Posted September 26, 2013 OK. Read it. No contamination. BF. When it's all sorted out - and when ALL the different types are accounted for - mtDNA will also include Asian, African, and one more that's really going be a head-shaker and eye-opener. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 IMHO Melba started this search mission with 200 plus samples from the bigfoot community that were supplied to her for testing. She selected approx 108 for further testing. The list of Labs she sent samples out to were very prestigious well known labs. There are several charges of "human" contamination of the samples after they were given the sample to test and returned back to Melba. How would or could a bulk sample be so contaminated that all testing would be analyzed ( by that prestigious list) as contaminated. Where's the paper work from them that claims contaminated. The presence of mtDNA is not contamination until proven contamination... The thought or chance that the Prestigious labs selected by Melba contaminated said samples is highly suspect.. Those combined labs successfully test millions of samples yearly with few if any charges of contamination. All contamination so far listed, runs along the mtDNA possibility..... Melba released her data with NOVA, and began another project. Nova may be her journal, but she insured that her information was out there first. IMHO.... she knows she is correct and that the Sykes study has two possibilities Unknown primate or no unknown primate. If his data supports Melba .... then Melba will be the Scientist that discovered ( identified) Sasquatch. The information is out there possibly right out in the open.... maybe in the terabytes of info she is having analyzed by another Lab or labs. I think she has got the goods and has the attitude of " I've got this" Time should tell the truth, possibly before the end of this current year... any way remember that Sykes is a year late now or thereabouts. Wally ain't no fool, he knows the status of the Melba Ketchum paper. The main I reason I posted this was to hopefully put a nail in the coffin of the claim that mainstream science will not take Bigfoot claims seriously. The Ketchum study was taken seriously enough by Nature to at least pass it on for peer review. And the comments by the peers do not dismiss it based solely on its premise. There is no ivory tower snubbing in evidence here. It was reviewed fairly by mainstream science. It was found lacking, but it was, at least, reviewed on its merits. Seems more like a statement by a guilty party than a nail in the coffin, Last I heard, all of those nails had been recalled. I still see the Lame stream Scientific community fudging on facts pertaining to Melba Ketchum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branco Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 You nailed it, SC. In a nutshell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmaker Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 "Many species are "known" to science only from one photo." -DWA Such as? Examples please... IMHO Melba started this search mission with 200 plus samples from the bigfoot community that were supplied to her for testing. She selected approx 108 for further testing. The list of Labs she sent samples out to were very prestigious well known labs. There are several charges of "human" contamination of the samples after they were given the sample to test and returned back to Melba. How would or could a bulk sample be so contaminated that all testing would be analyzed ( by that prestigious list) as contaminated. Where's the paper work from them that claims contaminated. The presence of mtDNA is not contamination until proven contamination... The thought or chance that the Prestigious labs selected by Melba contaminated said samples is highly suspect.. Those combined labs successfully test millions of samples yearly with few if any charges of contamination. All contamination so far listed, runs along the mtDNA possibility..... Melba released her data with NOVA, and began another project. Nova may be her journal, but she insured that her information was out there first. IMHO.... she knows she is correct and that the Sykes study has two possibilities Unknown primate or no unknown primate. If his data supports Melba .... then Melba will be the Scientist that discovered ( identified) Sasquatch. The information is out there possibly right out in the open.... maybe in the terabytes of info she is having analyzed by another Lab or labs. I think she has got the goods and has the attitude of " I've got this" Time should tell the truth, possibly before the end of this current year... any way remember that Sykes is a year late now or thereabouts. Wally ain't no fool, he knows the status of the Melba Ketchum paper. Seems more like a statement by a guilty party than a nail in the coffin, Last I heard, all of those nails had been recalled. I still see the Lame stream Scientific community fudging on facts pertaining to Melba Ketchum Yes. I always forget that at the end of every miserable result for Footers is a conspiracy theory! I have to stop doing that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 Is that saying, "better late, than never," really true? I may find out..anyone know the name of the original Ketchum thread..it is not pinned, and I think it was actually titled Erickson Project or something? I want to reread some of the detailed posts on paper... I did a basic search here, stupidly apparently b/c then I get a "flood" message and must wait 293 seconds to try again! gracias...don't go to trobule tho.. I'm sure I am just overlooking.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 "Many species are "known" to science only from one photo." -DWA Such as? Examples please... Yes. I always forget that at the end of every miserable result for Footers is a conspiracy theory! I have to stop doing that... Yep ..... But you forget, that conspiracy thingy has been there since the "Flat Earth Society" was a gleam in eye of some so called Scientist'. It just goes with the current EGO of the Scientific community. Many Proven Theories have been debunked since the Beginning of Time thingy... Proving theories ain't a 100 % given. Sykes could Scientifically Prove one theory and destroy an existing one. Who knows, opinions become theories, theories become reality, My opinion is Melba has more than we know, she's playing poker with this Bigfoot thingy and has not shown all her cards. Now ...... Once again, how is my opinion a conspiracy... It just my humble opinion. Stay tuned in ....... IMHO there is more info out there. Maybe Melba ........ Maybe Sykes ......... Maybe both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunflower Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 Yep ..... But you forget, that conspiracy thingy has been there since the "Flat Earth Society" was a gleam in eye of some so called Scientist'. It just goes with the current EGO of the Scientific community. Many Proven Theories have been debunked since the Beginning of Time thingy... Proving theories ain't a 100 % given. Sykes could Scientifically Prove one theory and destroy an existing one. Who knows, opinions become theories, theories become reality, My opinion is Melba has more than we know, she's playing poker with this Bigfoot thingy and has not shown all her cards. Now ...... Once again, how is my opinion a conspiracy... It just my humble opinion. Stay tuned in ....... IMHO there is more info out there. Maybe Melba ........ Maybe Sykes ......... Maybe both. Science Critic, Thank you for post #213 and the one above. I agree whole heartedly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted September 27, 2013 SSR Team Share Posted September 27, 2013 What an absolute train wreck this is. Derek Randles 5 hours ago · Edited Dear Dr. Melba Ketchum: I've made this request with your personal assistant, and I've also asked you directly, but still no response. Ms Ketchum, I want what's left of my sample back, and quite frankly I'm getting tired of waiting. The sample I'm referring to is sample 26. Just so there's no confusion, it's the sample Justin Smeja signed over to me, the sample that I gave you permission to test. I am the owner of the sample and I have the documentation stating so. You have told me repeatedly that there is some sample left. You have also told me you would send it to Wally for me. The least you could do considering Wally funded the majority of your study. The reason I want it back is simple. I want it re-tested. Posting this publicly is not my style, but in light of the fact I'm being ignored about this , and the BS seems to be getting thicker, I decided to post this publicly. I would very much appreciate a response from your " camp". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 27, 2013 Share Posted September 27, 2013 To steal a Mulderism...... Game Set Match !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 To steal a Mulderism...... Game Set Match !!! Game-set-match True, that is correct . game, set, match ...... Thank you, Mulder nailed this happening a while back.. Kinda DNA = Critterish or Critter = DNAish is another one of Mulder's that we will be able to apply to the Sykes study , That will also make it game / set / match when Sykes findings verify Melba's study. But thank you, for the calling of the "game you have been playing with anything Melba, as , I Didn't expect an honest admission of "Give-Up" from the Melba naysayers until Sykes verified Melba's sturdy next month. But thank you for your game set match as that woman Melba has been treated like a dog on most forums. But thanks anyway ..... BTW, if you were referring to the Derek / Melba squabble .... That won't be over until the Sykes release is over. Then during the overtime period (lawyer speak) (between Melba and Derek) you will discover "The Rest of the Story" , I understand that it might be undergoing further testing at a very qualified lab. Or two. But that should be next month also BUT .... BTW, have you noticed that Lately Sykes has been actually about 10 months late on his first established deadline .... So, of course all things are possible. Game set match is possible now.... Or November. But the skeptics can fold their hands anytime,,,,, Nuff Said Further reading is available at Robert Lindaeys site...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Scientific Critic- It was my understanding that #1 Sykes will not being verifing or comparing his study with the Ketchum study, and #2 Sykes had said that his study would possibly being finished in late 2013. May I just say that these study are not on any timeline to meet our expectations but to take the time and get to the bottom of the subject matter however long it takes. Truth trumps all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 That will also make it game / set / match when Sykes findings verify Melba's study. Not gonna happen. Get ready for dissapointment round #2. The Melbanites have nothing left but hope and the rest of that will be destroyed when Sykes comes up with either nothing or results that do not match hers in any way shape or form. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 @ BipedalCurious I doubt Sykes has nothing, or he would not be looking to publish. Why publish something that just says " Yeah, all you non-believers and science are correct, no bigfoot" that would be a huge waste of time and money. As far as the results matching, that's a coin toss, because Sykes and his people working with him are the only one knows what he has found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts