Doc Holliday Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 Here's Melba latest claim. So, in her opinion as a scientist, the sample is possibly a Shaman taking on a wolf appearance. holy Toledo batman........ and not long after all the mileage dogman has gotten around here lately...... imagine that. maybe some tuna in that dna too ?......... cause this smells fishy. anyone with ties to MK should probably imo , if this is the route she's going. 1
chelefoot Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 She is making a statement regarding her testing on the supposed Dogman specimens, Sasfooty. So, I don't think she is giving her opinion as a cake baker, or a gardener.
Sasfooty Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 No, I wouldn't think so. More likely she was either joking, or speaking as somebody who has seen some of the high strangeness that's associated with the BFs, .
Trogluddite Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 ^^ "...or speaking as somebody who has seen some of the high strangeness dollar signs that's associated with the BF scams," Fixed that - not trying to put words in your mouth, Sas, just offering an opinion as to what's going on.
chelefoot Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 I doubt she was joking. She is using money donated by her readers. Why in the world would she joke about the results (or her opinions of the possible results)?
Sasfooty Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 If she wasn't joking, we still have the second option. You keep disregarding that one.
WSA Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 I only reserve the right to have the greater scientific world confim Ms. Ketchum's conclusions about BF having human mtDNA. She may be just guessing, she may just be hoaxing, she may have just been duped by the samples submitted to her, but...the longer I look at this question, the more I come down on the "human" side of this question, or an ape/human hypbrid as she has claimed them to be. As leery as I am of this woman, if this result is eventually duplicated and confirmed, she will be entitled to a giant "I told you so." And yeah, she did. I rule out no outcome until we have an outcome. As of today, we don't. One researcher claiming this, and nothing more, is just a signboard that says, "Here is what others may want to consider."
MIB Posted January 20, 2015 Moderator Posted January 20, 2015 WSA - The idea of a hybrid accounts for, in a single stroke, a number of things that otherwise remain loose ends no viable solution accounts for. IMHO Melba herself is an unfortunate distraction from an otherwise elegant solution. If you were some "agent of misinformation" (I can't really call them MIBs, can I? ) how better to discredit the correct answer than to have it presented by someone who screws it all up the way Melba has? Perhaps she's not a patsy, not a plant, just someone known to have personality characteristics that would lead her to horribly mishandle something of this nature "tainting" that solution in a way that causes legitimate scientists who come along later to avoid that area of inquiry. MIB
WSA Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 (edited) Could be MIB. I prefer though to think of Dr. Ketchum as the proverbial blind hog that finds an acorn every now and then. I don't mean to denigrate her skills with that comparison, only to illustrate that she is not the messenger we wanted to bring important news about BF genetics. At least not the one I wanted. So much of this field is about overlooking those kinds of unfortunate personalities and just concentrating on the data and how you might reconcile it with other information. Ketchum's media persona, like the cultivated persona of so many of these researchers only serves to detract and distract. Wearing odd headgear, speaking in a grandiose hyperbolic manner and the whole, "They LAUGHED at me at the Royal Academy, but some day they will all eat their words.." schtick makes it hard to even get down to what the proposed theory really might be from a lot of these "personalities." Should it matter to me that Dr. Ketchum has apparently had a complete cosmetic makeover and frankly looks rather scary, or at least hyper-artificial ? It shouldn't, but yeah, it does. Those who are that invested in superficial appearances are going to find that when they claim the world doesn't take them seriously, we understand perfectly well why that might be even if they don't get it. So, it is a shame this message came from such a source, because I have to think it would have been better received if it came from almost any other. Sometimes though, you got to try and look past that, and I'm trying to with her. Edited January 20, 2015 by WSA
jayjeti Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 (edited) the more I come down on the "human" side of this question, or an ape/human hypbrid as she has claimed them to be. She addressed that on her Facebook page not long ago, commenting it was one of the false accusations circulating about her, namely that she believed BF was an ape/human hybrid. She believes they are a hybrid species of Homo sapien and some other hominid, not ape. Edited January 20, 2015 by jayjeti
Bonehead74 Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 WSA - The idea of a hybrid accounts for, in a single stroke, a number of things that otherwise remain loose ends no viable solution accounts for. IMHO Melba herself is an unfortunate distraction from an otherwise elegant solution. If you were some "agent of misinformation" (I can't really call them MIBs, can I? ) how better to discredit the correct answer than to have it presented by someone who screws it all up the way Melba has? Perhaps she's not a patsy, not a plant, just someone known to have personality characteristics that would lead her to horribly mishandle something of this nature "tainting" that solution in a way that causes legitimate scientists who come along later to avoid that area of inquiry. MIB ^^^ Wise words, these.
chelefoot Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 If she wasn't joking, we still have the second option. You keep disregarding that one. I don't think her opinion, based on her experience with high strangeness, should factor into her scientific findings. If she would stick to the facts, maybe she wouldn't be faced with all of the criticism that she is. Did she not learn anything from the mistakes she made with the DNA project? I guess not. 1
Bonehead74 Posted January 20, 2015 Posted January 20, 2015 If she believes she experienced any "high strangeness", wouldn't those experiences become her "facts"?
Doc Holliday Posted January 21, 2015 Posted January 21, 2015 considering the past, i'd wager her "facts "are largely determined by what might get attention and make a fast $ from any suckers willing to contribute to her "cause". attempting to label her as a convenient screw up that helps hide the truth sounds more like wishful thinking , imo. if played right there is $ to be had from "crypto-studies "and iirc Dr. K has played this game before , but it 's not surprising that many in BFery are willing to bend over for it yet again.. .... nor does it surprise some of us that not long ago "dogman" became a buzzword here after some of dr K's associates showed up and breathed life into it and now the good Dr just so happens to present a wolf man shaman theory....amazing. 1
Bonehead74 Posted January 21, 2015 Posted January 21, 2015 (edited) considering the past, i'd wager her "facts "are largely determined by what might get attention and make a fast $ from any suckers willing to contribute to her "cause". attempting to label her as a convenient screw up that helps hide the truth sounds more like wishful thinking , imo. Can't it be both? The two aren't mutually exclusive. Edited January 21, 2015 by Bonehead74
Recommended Posts