The Ketchum Report (Part 3)

[chelefoot]

And if the Public Statement were false, Melba undoubtably would file legal action for liable because her professional reputation IS on the line.

 

The fact that she hasn't (being that she has threatened legal action so many times in the past for much less damaging claims) speaks volumes.

 

There's so many red flags..... all you have to do is open you eyes to see them.

[Guest thermalman]

Now who is the "we" you are representing?

The Manson family, is my guess? Weren't they critical thinkers? Just saying. Edited November 5, 2013 by thermalman

[southernyahoo]

It is very odd to me that Wally would write a check for something that wasn't for sale.

 

Why would JAMEZ need to change their name if there was no transaction and no review of the paper? They could have denied everything right out of the gate, and there would be law suits within days.

 

Why would they wait so long to issue these denials of having anything to do with Ketchums paper?

 

Why did they create the Journal DeNovo? Out of the goodness of his heart no doubt. Seems mighty friendly for a Journal to do that for a scientist which they had absolutely no interaction with. 

 

Why would Ketchum try to buy a journal, if she intended to self publish all along? She could have anyone build the website but got it done for free?

 

There is more truth to find out there folks.

Edited November 6, 2013 by See-Te-Cah NC
To remove personal information

[Guest]

I think it's pretty obvious she didn't buy or acquire any journal and that is just a back story created to give the illusion of a passing peer review and scientific bias.

[TimB]

There are red flags in every facet of this game.  And it is a game.  The kind of game where anyone can insert themselves and claim relevance.  If Wally's hurt, Wally should do something about it.  If Melba's hurt, Melba should do something about it. Everyone needs to put their big-person pants on and deal with what ails them or move on.

 

This thread and it's content is nothing more than the bigfoot equivalent of the Jerry Springer show, with audience members trying to get their moment "on camera" by being foolish and the crowd of observers are hooting and hollering and slavering about nothing but low-brow showmanship.All it needs is a bald guy pretending to stop the fight that will never happen.  If this thread had never happened, the situation would be exactly as it is now.  A whole pile of nothing.  As has been said many times over the past several years- NOTHING to see here.

Edited November 6, 2013 by See-Te-Cah NC
To remove personal info

[Guest]

Can't say I agree completely but I do think public discussion helps uncover facts regardless what they are.

Edited November 5, 2013 by BipedalCurious

[southernyahoo]

BipedalCurious, on 05 Nov 2013 - 08:53 AM, said:

I think it's pretty obvious she didn't buy or acquire any journal and that is just a back story created to give the illusion of a passing peer review and scientific bias.

Or there is back pedaling on the part of JAMEZ. Hand the check back, change your name and pretend their was no exchange of anything with rights to reviews etc.

There would be no need to reorganize and rename your journal if it has never reviewed a single paper on anything. Why couldn't they just stay JAMEZ? It only makes sense if they got cold feet on the whole thing and wanted out. They could have just rejected it, or handed it back, but why didn't they? There's no report of that. They could own up to that just like Nature but instead we have this report of a check uncashed "after" Ketchum claimed to acquire them and rights to the reviews. It's just pure dodgy on the part of JAMEZ and or FAZE to say they had no deal with Ketchum or Wally but fixed her up with a new Journal? It just doesn't sound like a journal that just told her to take a hike does it?

I'd say that's why the pricipals involved have not attempted to sue.

[Guest Tyler H]

It is very odd to me that Wally would write a check for something that wasn't for sale.

 

Why would JAMEZ need to change their name if there was no transaction and no review of the paper? They could have denied everything right out of the gate, and there would be law suits within days.

 

Why would they wait so long to issue these denials of having anything to do with Ketchums paper?

 

Why did they create the Journal DeNovo? Out of the goodness of his heart no doubt. Seems mighty friendly for a Journal to do that for a scientist which they had absolutely no interaction with. 

 

Why would Ketchum try to buy a journal, if she intended to self publish all along? She could have anyone build the website but got it done for free?

 

There is more truth to find out there folks.

 

 

There are red flags in every facet of this game.  And it is a game.  The kind of game where anyone can insert themselves and claim relevance.  If Wally's hurt, Wally should do something about it.  If Melba's hurt, Melba should do something about it. Everyone needs to put their big-person pants on and deal with what ails them or move on.

 

This thread and it's content is nothing more than the bigfoot equivalent of the Jerry Springer show, with audience members trying to get their moment "on camera" by being foolish and the crowd of observers are hooting and hollering and slavering about nothing but low-brow showmanship.All it needs is a bald guy pretending to stop the fight that will never happen.  If this thread had never happened, the situation would be exactly as it is now.  A whole pile of nothing.  As has been said many times over the past several years- NOTHING to see here.

Pure speculation here, but I have had many conversations with Wally. I think he likely knows he won't get money out of Melba, and he's just not the vindictive type. He may also think that it just brings the field further down to have this end up in public court cases. He may also feel foolish. I don't know, but I don't see how this has any real bearing on the facts of the case.

 

The cheque that slostepper refers to was written and returned to Wally. I think he was a well-meaning person who bought into Melba too much, and now is trying to make it right. BUt he's deathly afraid of having his name associated with this field. 

He was not a "squatcher" at all prior to this MK project. (Or so he claimed to me anyways)

 

I think it could be argued that Wally IS putting his big pants on, by just "sucking it up"  -  taking his licks and moving on. Why would you say that him going to court is "putting his big pants on"?

 

Many of us just wish this would die. If Melba stopped seeking publicity, I may have left this alone - in fact, I had for months. But then she opens her mouth again, and once again taints evidence, credibility etc... and it's bad for newbies to the field in particular. They can get taken advantage of, or become disillusioned.

 

  If this thread had never happened, the situation would be exactly as it is now.  A whole pile of nothing.  As has been said many times over the past several years- NOTHING to see here.

"If this thread had never happened"... by extension I'll assume maybe you mean the entire undertakings of those of us who set out to expose Melba?

I have to disagree - if we had not done that, our field would have no shred of credibility, as it would have taken longer for her to be doubted, and ALL the doubt cast upon her would have come from the outside. We would have lost that much more credibility as a community. At least this way, the outside world sees we are self-policing, and determined to stick to facts, regardless of how it hurts our aspirations. If Bart and I had not done independent testing, I likely would have been supporting Melba for a long time and telling knowledgeable scientists that they "just don't get it" and "refuse to believe the science" as set out by Melba. Fortunately I have a skeptical nature, and I put my money where my mouth is, and I see things through to some sort of conclusion. Same for Bart. I never called out Melba UNTIL I had lab results. Until then, it was just unfounded suspicion. But that suspicion led me to uncover the truth. I think that is valuable.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Tyler H
removal of personal info

[southernyahoo]

Finding the truth is valuable, I'll stand with you on that, but we've not found the truth in repeatable fasion for bigfoot until some of these samples test the same repeatedly in the positive in some way. Ketchum felt she did it in the repeating human mtDNA and the repeating nuclear mess in the rest of the genome. Not to take a shot at her, but thats just what repeated for her, and on samples that didn't match human in every respect morphologically.

 

This is the truth from her perspective, and wanted to follow through for Wally and Erickson I'm sure, perhaps too badly. But going forward, If she really had 100+ BF samples in her study, it should be a powerfull predictor in future results. So I'd question these results carefully when they repeat and are assumed negative.

[TimB]

I don't think the conduct of anyone posting on this forum established truth or credibility.  The vitriol demonstrated against Ketchum was unprofessional, negative, and personal.  There's a lot of cloak and dagger posings that have been accepted as truth because they've been repeated so much.  There is not proof of anything but a poorly written report.  Everything else is just he said/she said and it's sickening.  If anyone feels the Bigfoot "community" has benefited from any of this they need to re-examine their views.

[Guest]

Conduct doesn't establish truth. Facts do.

Fact: Paper never passed any peer-review.

Edited November 5, 2013 by BipedalCurious

[Guest]

Scholastica has called the screen shot of the leaked peer review on Carpenter's blog a "fabrication," and is referring people to the Smokey blog for more info. Go to https://www.facebook.com/scholasticahq

and look for a post by Edward Squatchmaster, then look for Scholastica's response.

 

Oh, I'm sorry - I'm asking people to check a source and the facts for themselves.

 

My bad.

[Guest SDBigfooter]

Truthers and deniers???  Ha sounds like politics to me.  Is this a yahoo comments section???  I kid.

 

She laid it out there.  Take it or leave it.  Hopefully everyone can agree that her data does not mean much if no one ever reproduces it independently.

 

Her report is just as good as any other potential evidence in my opinion.  It is just as good as anything in the world of Bigfoot.  Every known individual in this community should be taken with a grain of salt. 

 

Bipedal, I wanted to add that I consistently disagree with you.  For the most part, everything you say makes me scratch my head. 

[Cotter]

There are red flags in every facet of this game.  And it is a game.  The kind of game where anyone can insert themselves and claim relevance.  If Wally's hurt, Wally should do something about it.  If Melba's hurt, Melba should do something about it.    Everyone needs to put their big-person pants on and deal with what ails them or move on.

 

This thread and it's content is nothing more than the bigfoot equivalent of the Jerry Springer show, with audience members trying to get their moment "on camera" by being foolish and the crowd of observers are hooting and hollering and slavering about nothing but low-brow showmanship.All it needs is a bald guy pretending to stop the fight that will never happen.  If this thread had never happened, the situation would be exactly as it is now.  A whole pile of nothing.  As has been said many times over the past several years- NOTHING to see here.

*throws chair*

Edited November 6, 2013 by See-Te-Cah NC
Edit of quoted content

[Guest]

So SD... you think her paper passed peer review?

Edited November 5, 2013 by BipedalCurious