Olympic Peninsula Nesting Area Update

[hiflier]

Norseman, the mtDNA, the easiest thing to test for, came back 100% Human. But the hair it came from isn't morphologically Human. Can this possibly be any simpler? Dr. Ketchum was selected as one of a group (probably quite a large group) of geneticists to test DNA of Humans after the Trade Tower collapse. The sequencing cover both genders of Humans-  so she's no slouch.

Edited August 11, 2017 by hiflier

[norseman]

From my link:

 

The few experienced geneticists who viewed the paper reported a dismal opinion of it noting it made little sense.⁵³ The DNA sequences did indeed contain matches to human chromosome 11, a lot of undetermined DNA, and some that, in part, matched to other animals. Thus, the whole sequences do not resemble any known animal and are contradictory with evolutionary biology. In a curious sidenote, the term de novo is used in bioinformatics to designate the absence of a reference genome. Next generation sequencing (NGS) technology was used in this study to read the whole genome, a process that used to be far more time and labor-intensive. There are problems with NGS de novo protocols that can lead to poor data quality. We do not know if the results were properly evaluated prior to concluding that the genome data could be used and if the interpretation of the results is reasonable. These factors will likely come into play during the expert external reviews of the paper.

Some critics have stated that the DNA may have been contaminated. Ketchum assures everyone that she fully accounted for contamination issues and dismisses this allegation, citing her own the lab’s experience with handling forensic crime samples. The samples have not been made available to others so there is currently no way for anyone to run a retest to compare results. There appear to be multiple places where the data quality could have been compromised, regardless of how confident Ketchum is in her results.

The Circus That Followed

Accompanying the official version of the paper was Erickson’s video, which supposedly showed a sleeping Sasquatch. The short clip, made public a day later, showed a brown, furry mass sleeping on a woodland floor. The Erickson project claimed that DNA was obtained from this individual, named Matilda, which was analyzed as part of the Ketchum study providing a link to a real creature. The promised high-definition video evidence was not made available. Within a week, researcher Bill Munns claimed that he had acquired still shots of Matilda whereby the face strongly resembled Chewbacca, a tall, hairy Bigfoot-esque creature from the Star Wars movies.⁵⁴ If that wasn’t enough to increase the derision for Ketchum’s work, what may be the most humiliating find came from careful readers on a skeptical forum.⁵⁵ Three of the references cited in the Ketchum paper as prior published research on the creatures were discovered to be questionable in validity. One was an openly-stated April Fools prank that concluded the Yeti was actually an ungulate (hoofed mammal) and that its resemblance to apes was due to convergent evolution. When confronted with this information, Ketchum denied responsibility, saying she was told to include “all” references by one reviewer. She did not concede that she knew they weren’t reputable scientific works.

So what does Ketchum have? Is it human DNA with an undocumented variation? Is it animal samples contaminated with human DNA or vice versa? Is it a concocted hoax? Or is it actual unique DNA that may point to the existence of an unknown hominin (or two)? In a revealing interview on  Coast to Coast AM she told the public she is not after glory, would rather avoid the publicity, and has turned down (others’) money-making offers. She admitted that she wouldn’t tackle this project if given another chance due to the trouble it created for her. She admits she was not privy to the culture of Sasquatchery that exists where many players try to either one-up or discredit the other person.

She is solidly convinced that she has enough data to unquestionably make the case for the existence of Bigfoot even without a type specimen. In the  Coast to Coast AMconversation, she likened them to “special forces soldiers” who cannot be seen unless they want to be. She has completely accepted that they exist across North America and wishes them to be protected as a tribe of people.^4,50 Her research continues.

In the presentation of this potentially earth-shaking discovery, Dr. Ketchum lost every shred of scientific credibility through her short-circuiting genetic experts and the process of peer review. Instead, she at­tempted to appeal to the popular Bigfoot enthusiast crowd as their savior who has the goods. Even that backfired. She continues to make excuses instead of admitting her errors and poor judgment. She censors those who point out these serious problems or ask questions about them, and she has not exhibited cooperation with geneticists who are experts in human DNA. The people supporting her are not usually helpful to her cause. Her disclosures about her own personal sightings and obvious missteps in the process have done much to sabotage her own credibility. It’s not a pleasant picture.

[hiflier]

17 minutes ago, norseman said:

Some critics have stated that the DNA may have been contaminated. Ketchum assures everyone that she fully accounted for contamination issues and dismisses this allegation, citing her own the lab’s experience with handling forensic crime samples. The samples have not been made available to others so there is currently no way for anyone to run a retest to compare results. There appear to be multiple places where the data quality could have been compromised, regardless of how confident Ketchum is in her results

 

This quote is from you link with the bolding and underlining being mine. Now, tell me how truly definitive these statements are. Fact is they are NOT definitive. They are stated only to cast doubt. They even start off by saying "SOME CRITICS" which is to say not ALL critics. You are only seeing and promoting what you want to see and promote.

 

Certainly NONE of the above quote is as definitive as this one from Ketchum's paper:

 

"Most of the submitted hairs were not microscopically consistent with any of the hairs from the reference collection of common animal hairs that included human, cat, dog, cow, horse, deer, elk, antelope, moose, sheep, fox, bear, coyote, wolf, rat, mouse, monkey, beaver, squirrel, llama and others."

 

So I read that the balance of the submitted sample hairs was microscopically consistent with know animals- including Human. I also see that SOMEONE on that team knew the difference. Hmm, imagine that!

Edited August 12, 2017 by hiflier

[norseman]

I'm only seeing and promoting the FACT that science has not proclaimed Ketchum's study to be correct that a real creature called Bigfoot really exists!!!! Hello!?

 

My link was written in 2013!

 

 

If you really want to believe that Ketchum is correct and has been railroaded? Have at it.

[hiflier]

52 minutes ago, norseman said:

 The DNA sequences did indeed contain matches to human chromosome 11, a lot of undetermined DNA, and some that, in part, matched to other animals. Thus, the whole sequences do not resemble any known animal and are contradictory with evolutionary biology

 

Yes it was 2013. I know because I had read it before. There are sequences that are in DNA that match ALL animals. Humans and chimps being only one example. All animals are from this planet. All animals have the same building blocks. And yes sequences are different for each species. So you should easily have the answer to this one: How is it that three complete genomes from three different locations matched. Do you know what that signifies? It signifies that creatures from the same species were in those three different locations. it also means evolution be damned. These things exist. You saw a trackway, did you see piles of tissue in that trackway from a body that was falling apart because its nuclear DNA was incompatible with itself? Was Patty a puddle of goo? or have the top notch of a chicken and the hoofs of a cow? post whatever links you wish NONE of them are as precise as Dr. Kechum's paper, nor the care the team took with these samples. Why would they lie about such things? People from law enforcement labs with decades of experience?

 

To say in that quote that the whole sequences do not resemble any known animal and are contradictory to evolutionary biology is something proponents for the existence of Sasquatch ALREADY KNOW. The quote isn't saying the creature cannot exist it is saying it doesn't follow evolutionary lines if it DOES exist. You can bet my nuDNA is Human but has short sequence elements in it that other animals have as well.

 

Science is NEVER going to proclaim Sasquatch as being real. Is that really such a shock to anyone?

Edited August 12, 2017 by hiflier

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

If the key parts of the reality of this phenomenon were to ever be popularly known, Ketchum would likely try to come back with yet another major scam. I say this partly because her claims very closely match the actual phenomenon that we're dealing with.

 

I hope hiflier can remember that

[norseman]

So boiled down to brass tacks....your advocating that Bigfoot since it does NOT follow evolutionary lines (My link never implied that. It implied Ketchum's study was flawed), that Bigfoot was created in some sort of Island of Dr. Moreau? 

 

Hiflier I cannot follow you down your path of self delusion.....sorry. This is like watching the six million dollar man Bigfoot episode and confusing it with Mutual of Omaha's wild kingdom.

 

Bill Munn's who has worked very hard on the PGF, busted Ketchum and Erickson on their Matilda costume, the supposed Bigfoot that looks exactly like Chewbacca that your beyond reproach DNA sample comes from! Hello?

 

I'm out.

14 minutes ago, OntarioSquatch said:

If the key parts of the reality of this phenomenon were to ever be popularly known, Ketchum would likely try to come back with yet another major scam. I say this partly because her claims very closely match the actual phenomenon that we're dealing with.

 

I hope hiflier can remember that

 

So Ketchum's scam closely resembles your "alien DNA theory", so you want everyone to make some sort of distinction between the two when your proven correct? Is that about right?

 

My head hurts.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

14 minutes ago, norseman said:

So Ketchum's scam closely resembles your "alien DNA theory", so you want everyone to make some sort of distinction between the two when your proven correct? Is that about right?

 

Yes

[norseman]

Then what makes you so sure Ketchum is a scam? Maybe she is working with them or is one? Maybe it's wearing a Melba "suit"?

[hiflier]

44 minutes ago, OntarioSquatch said:

Ketchum would likely try to come back with yet another major scam......

 

41 minutes ago, norseman said:

So Ketchum's scam.............

(Interesting......)

 

I already talked about 'Chewbacca". And, Norseman, I don't care if you or anyone else follows me down that path or not. Neither you, or anyone else, address any of my questions so why should I.  

Edited August 12, 2017 by hiflier

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

14 minutes ago, norseman said:

Then what makes you so sure Ketchum is a scam?

 

Partly for reasons myself and others such as yourself have already explained. Altogether, I think there's an extremely compelling case for it being a money scam. 

 

The issue now is that hiflier as totally lost his skepticism. Ketchum could claim nearly anything she wants, and hiflier would believe it.

 

Edited August 12, 2017 by OntarioSquatch

[Martin]

 

48 minutes ago, norseman said:

 

Bill Munn's who has worked very hard on the PGF, busted Ketchum and Erickson on their Matilda costume, the supposed Bigfoot that looks exactly like Chewbacca that your beyond reproach DNA sample comes from! Hello?

 

 

The hair Ketchum tested was seen to come directly from that chewy masked creature. That 1/3rd of her genome study is absolute garbage. The Erickson creature is a hoax. That's the entire hair portion.

 

The other 2 were saliva and blood right? 

[norseman]

6 minutes ago, OntarioSquatch said:

 

Partly for reasons myself and others such as yourself have already explained. Altogether, I think there's an extremely compelling case for it being a money scam. 

 

The issue now is that hiflier as totally lost his skepticism. Ketchum could claim nearly anything she wants, and hiflier would believe it.

 

 

???????

 

Does Lloyd Pye have alien DNA?

 

Here is how I see it. Both you and Hiflier have gone off the deep end. Desperately searching for answers you have both lost your skepticism....and how.

 

Please return to Earth.

9 minutes ago, Martin said:

 

 

The hair Ketchum tested was seen to come directly from that chewy masked creature. That 1/3rd of her genome study is absolute garbage. The Erickson creature is a hoax. That's the entire hair portion.

 

The other 2 were saliva and blood right? 

 

1/3? You are way way kind.

 

I do not know what the other two samples are.....but I can assure you none of them contain a complete genome of a undiscovered creature. It's a hodgepodge of DNA strands of unrelated known animals and human.

 

 

[hiflier]

37 minutes ago, norseman said:

I do not know what the other two samples are.....

 

 Then it looks like you need to read up some  And I have not gone off the deep end by any stretch. I have a conundrum I've been trying to settle. So far the 'trying' is working. It's a pretty simple conundrum really. It just depends on how far I want to take things to finish out the picture. Don't you worry, I know what I'm doing. And you know what I'm doing too. Just attempting to solve a little riddle. No biggie. I'm basically working though this: http://www.sasquatchgenomeproject.org/linked/novel-north-american-hominins-final-pdf-download.pdf

 

Anyone care to help? Um........lemme guess.......the answer would be an across-the-board "NO", right? LOL!

Edited August 12, 2017 by hiflier

[Yuchi1]

The Ketchum antagonists remind me of the cat that got into the laxative. Last anyone saw of it there were four cats in front digging and six behind, covering up,

 

The only thing deader than their prognostications is the Project Grendel website.