jayjeti Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Untrue. I don't know if she used it in print but she certainly used it in verbal discussion. If what you say is true about a ... colloquial? ... meaning, that was lost on the people she was talking to. I will note that I did not find any support for your claim as to the meaning of the term with a search engine so it is very extremely obscure ... if true at all. MIB Is it possible you assume or have read erroneous claims that she spoke of "angel DNA" in her discussions. I assume you're mostly going by the rumor mills that applies "high strangeness" to Ketchum in saying she talked about BF having angel DNA -- a false rumor to attach the "weird kook" moniker to her. "My claim," as you say, about the usage of the term "angel DNA" comes from the article I linked to, if you would read the article it states, "On Team Tazer's Facebook page, Melody Knowles explains that "Angel DNA" is an old term used for unknown DNA." If you can't verify that in Internet searches, searches don't always pull up what you are looking for. It might be an old obscure term. I linked to an article which notes the blogger who was the source behind people referencing the "angel DNA" comment. Ketchum says it did not come from her or her team. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xion Comrade Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 (edited) Is it possible you assume or have read erroneous claims that she spoke of "angel DNA" in her discussions. I assume you're mostly going by the rumor mills that applies "high strangeness" to Ketchum in saying she talked about BF having angel DNA -- a false rumor to attach the "weird kook" moniker to her. "My claim," as you say, about the usage of the term "angel DNA" comes from the article I linked to, if you would read the article it states, "On Team Tazer's Facebook page, Melody Knowles explains that "Angel DNA" is an old term used for unknown DNA." If you can't verify that in Internet searches, searches don't always pull up what you are looking for. It might be an old obscure term. I linked to an article which notes the blogger who was the source behind people referencing the "angel DNA" comment. Ketchum says it did not come from her or her team. I have always found that most of the accusations made against Ketchum were nothing but raw character assassination and unfounded BS, she was in way over her head to begin with and there was no way a person could have pulled off what she tried to do under the circumstances. Once everyone(Erickson in particular) pulled out it just kind of seemed to leave her hanging by the neck, and everyone proceeded to just pummel the crap out of her as is customary in the bigfoot world. "What I said has been twisted like a game of gossip amongst children so now the haters say I said the progenitor was a giant extinct lemur." That pretty much sums the whole thing up, most people just have no clue how bitter, ultra-negative, and ignorant the Bigfoot community at large is, and Melba is(Or I should say was, as she definitely got thoroughly educated in this matter) certainly one of those people. And I might add that Erickson had the real deal, the video was all quite real... Edited January 27, 2015 by Xion Comrade 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted January 27, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted January 27, 2015 (edited) ^ and some people simply disagree seeing the same "dataset" but know a shyster when they see one. I've had enough of Ketchum and her sauce. Carry on. But orangutans can laugh and whistle I hear. Scientists have long known that orangutans copy physical movements of humans, but Bonnie’s whistling indicates that the learning capacities of orangutans and other great apes in the auditory domain might be more flexible than previously believed, Wich said. The behavior goes against the argument that orangutans have no control over their vocalizations and the sounds are purely emotional – that is, an involuntary response to stimuli such as predators. Bonnie appears to whistle for the sake of making a sound rather than to receive a food reward or some other incentive. If asked to whistle, she is likely to oblige, another indication to scientists that she makes the sound voluntarily. In their paper, Wich and his colleagues also shared anecdotal information about Indah, a female orangutan who lived with Bonnie at the National Zoo before moving to Great Ape Trust in 2004. Indah also began to whistle some years after Bonnie was first observed making the sound in the late 1980s, but Indah died before recordings could be made of her whistles. Scientists believe that Indah’s whistling was a vocalization learned from Bonnie. That compares with what scientists assume about social learning in wild orangutan populations. For example earlier work by Dr. van Schaik and colleagues showed that wild orangutans in one population make a “raspberry†sound during nest-making, while orangutans in another population make a “nest smack†sound when engaged in the same activity. Wich said it’s unlikely that purely genetic or ecological factors explain the differences in sounds of different orangutan populations. Rather, it’s more likely others copy one orangutan’s innovative sound because the sound serves a function. “This is a very strong indication that different sounds among wild populations are learned and are not purely genetically or ecologically based,†Wich said. “This is a great indication that orangutans can learn sounds not in their repertoire from another species, and they are flexible in using them.†Adapted from materials provided by Great Ape Trust of Iowa. Edited January 27, 2015 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted January 27, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted January 27, 2015 (edited) ^ edit time ran out, missed a link to laugh above: http://news.sciencemag.org/social-sciences/2009/06/10-million-year-old-laugh Evolution_of_Laughter.pdf Edited January 27, 2015 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayjeti Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 (edited) I have always found that most of the accusations made against Ketchum were nothing but raw character assassination and unfounded BS, she was in way over her head to begin with and there was no way a person could have pulled off what she tried to do under the circumstances. Once everyone(Erickson in particular) pulled out it just kind of seemed to leave her hanging by the neck, and everyone proceeded to just pummel the crap out of her as is customary in the bigfoot world. "What I said has been twisted like a game of gossip amongst children so now the haters say I said the progenitor was a giant extinct lemur." That pretty much sums the whole thing up, most people just have no clue how bitter, ultra-negative, and ignorant the Bigfoot community at large is, and Melba is(Or I should say was, as she definitely got thoroughly educated in this matter) certainly one of those people. And I might add that Erickson had the real deal, the video was all quite real... Well said. I think some of her detractors are BF skeptics, including skeptical scientists, whom make convincing arguments to BF believers, and as you note in customary fashion the BF world proceeds to pummel. When I first heard she believed bigfoot resulted from a non-human primate and a human mating in the not so distant past, like many others I thought that sounded nutty. But it seems that I, and a lot of other people were being played for a fool with false rumors, but once the ball is rolling people don't like to be wrong. Some people here are saying she is doing it to swindle people out of money, that its all a sham. But really, is she not actually trying to do science on BF DNA and make genuine discoveries? I'm no expert in this stuff. Maybe she's reaching bad conclusions on some things, I don't know, and I think a lot of others don't really know either. Edited January 27, 2015 by jayjeti Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted January 27, 2015 Author Share Posted January 27, 2015 Thx Biped! This part is intriguing! Puts some serious creedence into the potential of BF (if they exist) utilizing mimicry. (my bold) “This is a great indication that orangutans can learn sounds not in their repertoire from another species, and they are flexible in using them.†Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VAfooter Posted February 20, 2015 Admin Share Posted February 20, 2015 Here are a couple of interesting reports dealing with BF language, both in the same general area, during the same season and year, and in very similar circumstances (almost makes me wonder if they are not duplicates, but it seems they are not). http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/report_detail.php?id=01451 http://www.oregonbigfoot.com/report_detail.php?id=03865 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted February 20, 2015 SSR Team Share Posted February 20, 2015 43 reports of "speech" in the SSR so far, with not one being from the Southern States. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted February 21, 2015 BFF Patron Share Posted February 21, 2015 ^ I have nonpublished reports that human-like chatter from BF occurs in the Blue Ridge of NC anyway. Others have same from Blue Ridge of GA. A lot of this is independent researcher documentation that may not reach BFRO. Not sure about FL skunkapes, you might have a point there. Sounds like AL has episodes of chatter. Not sure about SC and VA. I would imagine TN has a few if you believe the 50 years with BF incidents. Can't friggin' believe nobody downloaded the evolution of laughter .pdf in my post above? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lightheart Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Don't know about skunk apes but the bigfoot here do indeed speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts