Ketchum DNA report revisited

[MIB]

Norseman is correct.    That is a matter of historical record for anyone who will put down the cool aid and take time to educate themselves.

 

MIB

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

She didn’t provide DNA that could properly support her theory. That’s what it came down to in terms of her “study” failing. It wasn’t because it was self-published. If she did have the supporting DNA, scientists coud at least look at it and tell that there’s something to it. Instead, she provided DNA that was heavily contaminated and degraded. She was fully aware of this, but put it out anyway, as her supporters don’t know enough about genetics and the backstory to realize that the “study” is a sham. 

 

The only thing that she studied all those years was Wally Hersom’s gullibility

[LeafTalker]

2 hours ago, hiflier said:

 

My son set up MY website and somehow I didn't think it would be an issue since I didn't know how to. The original journal requested a list of changes to make in order for them to publish the paper. Dr. Ketchum met the criteria and they were ready to publish but then were advised by their legal counsel to not do so. And even though many disagreed with Dr. Ketchum's decision to purchase the journal, rename it, then and publish the study with peer review, she was not breaking new ground in doing so.

 

The decision to do so was not without precedent and she followed guidelines that, before her, had already been set for others before her in order to do so. She went by the book so to speak for following the proper protocols setting up the journal. Didn't matter though, she got slammed for it anyway. And because she did it, even in the right way, people have used the move as the reason the paper failed. i.e. Dr. Todd Disotell:

 

(my bold)

 

"This is a look without basis for motive, or supposition, but rather a dry look at why the Ketchum Study has failed.

 

Make no mistake, it has failed, as it missed the mark in being published in an established scientific journal with peer review with some degree of scientific acceptance."

 

Amazing to me really. So the entire manuscript with all of the science, supplementary raw data, and somewhere around 1800 pages of billions of pieces of sequence just from ONE of the three genomes...........failed because it missed the mark in an ESTABLISHED journal. So, just toss out a five year effort. See how easy it is to trash something outside the norm? One sentence and it's over. Thank you, Dr. Disotell. And at the time of his writing he said he had only read the summary and conclusions parts of the paper.

 

I advise everyone who has not read everything on the Sasquatch Genome Project's website to please do so. It will make the going here for all so much easier. I want to leave this thread. I need to leave this thread. You don't need me on this thread. All you need to do is read for yourselves.

 

hiflier, you ROCK!!!!!!! I am so impressed by the research you've done, your command of the facts, and your tireless advocacy for the truth. Enjoy a well-deserved vacation from the thread.

[Martin]

3 hours ago, hiflier said:

 

My son set up MY website and somehow I didn't think it would be an issue since I didn't know how to. The original journal requested a list of changes to make in order for them to publish the paper. Dr. Ketchum met the criteria and they were ready to publish but then were advised by their legal counsel to not do so. And even though many disagreed with Dr. Ketchum's decision to purchase the journal, rename it, then and publish the study with peer review, she was not breaking new ground in doing so.

 

 

She didn't purchase a journal she had a website built by her crony and called it a journal. She may have paid some kind of fee but it was only to give herself so cover.  The entire fiasco is well documented. As of the last time I looked the website listed Melba's "paper" as it's sole article.

 

Could you please provide a link to the "legal counsels" advice you mention above?

[bipedalist]

Ok, Martin, don't rub it in, he has heard this four times from me, and prolly four times from others, but he is not a Ketchum advocate, go figure!

 

Like Norseman, I refuse to further beat my head into this nothingness, have at it thread, I'm gone!

Edited October 24, 2017 by bipedalist

[hiflier]

Sure. I'm using this link because I read Sharon Hill's stuff too: http://doubtfulnews.com/2013/02/ketchum-bigfoot-dna-paper-released-problems-with-questionable-publication/ 

 

"After this journal agreed to publish the manuscript, their legal counsel advised them not to publish a manuscript on such a controversial subject as it would destroy the editors’ reputations (as it has already done to mine).  I have documentation on all of this drama."

Edited October 24, 2017 by hiflier

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

The quote originates from Melba herself, and is likely another lie among the mountain of falsehoods that she had piled up to give her paper credibility in the eyes of her supporters

[hiflier]

14 hours ago, norseman said:

Ok..... I cant take it.

 

The ONLY person that trashed Melba Ketchum?

 

Was MELBA KETCHUM!!!

 

13 hours ago, MIB said:

Norseman is correct.    That is a matter of historical record for anyone who will put down the cool aid and take time to educate themselves.

 

MIB

 

13 hours ago, OntarioSquatch said:

She didn’t provide DNA that could properly support her theory. That’s what it came down to in terms of her “study” failing. It wasn’t because it was self-published. If she did have the supporting DNA, scientists coud at least look at it and tell that there’s something to it. Instead, she provided DNA that was heavily contaminated and degraded. She was fully aware of this, but put it out anyway, as her supporters don’t know enough about genetics and the backstory to realize that the “study” is a sham. 

 

The only thing that she studied all those years was Wally Hersom’s gullibility

 

11 hours ago, Martin said:

 

She didn't purchase a journal she had a website built by her crony and called it a journal. She may have paid some kind of fee but it was only to give herself so cover.  The entire fiasco is well documented. As of the last time I looked the website listed Melba's "paper" as it's sole article.

 

Could you please provide a link to the "legal counsels" advice you mention above?

 

9 hours ago, bipedalist said:

Ok, Martin, don't rub it in, he has heard this four times from me, and prolly four times from others, but he is not a Ketchum advocate, go figure!

 

Like Norseman, I refuse to further beat my head into this nothingness, have at it thread, I'm gone!

 

7 hours ago, OntarioSquatch said:

The quote originates from Melba herself, and is likely another lie among the mountain of falsehoods that she had piled up to give her paper credibility in the eyes of her supporters

 

But there's NO evidence of INTENTIONAL wrong-doing. Mis-interpreting data is not intentional wrong-doing. Who started the idea of her running some kind of hoax? Who was the first person to say it? How did the idea catch fire, spread so fast, and then end up so deeply entrenched on this Forum? An idea of hoaxing that has NO BASIS IN FACT?

 

That means the ideas and subsequent accusations are all based on PURE ASSUMPTION- every one of them- PURE ASSUMPTION- and yet the ideas took hold and are still alive and well to this very moment. Those ideas made sure Dr. Melba Ketchum got kicked into a hole and is, to this day, making sure that she never gets out.

All because someone decided the Sasquatch Genome Project was some elaborate scheme to INTENTIONALLY defraud and deceive the public and the projects supporters. But again, there's no proof that Dr. Ketchum, through her own volition, EVER intended to defroud or deceive anyone.

 

That is the point I've been making. And with no proof of her doing anything of the sort why is it that some folks simply have no desire to accept that? But instead insist on continuing to debase and fuel what amounts to nothing more than innuendo. I've come accross NOTHING that in any way says Dr. Ketchum purposely executed some grand plan of deception.

 

No one that looks into this will find any such plan either. Someone way back called the SGP a hoax and, by default, Ketchum the hoaxer. Without proof, without evidence, and without merit. And THAT is the only fact in the whole thing. Years of torment for no solid, truthful, reason. Why did that that? And why hasn't it been seen for what it is? Where did it come from? And more importantly, why is there no evidence of it being anywhere near true?

 

And since there is no basis or proof why is the hoaxer, liar, defrauder, thing still so alive on this Forum? I am not blind nor drinking anyone's Kool-Aid because I find no proof or evidence of intentional wrong-doing. There quite simply IS no evidence or proof to be found. Anything I have found has been nothing more pure conjecture. I think it's time way overdue for people to finally realize it and accept it. To not do so at this point will only fuel the flames of assumption with nothing out there to back it up. There's just zero out there that has said intentional hoax. Time for the white flag folks.

Edited October 24, 2017 by hiflier

[norseman]

Bill Munns broke Matilda as a hoax. Ketchum was directly involved with the Erickson project and told quite a few stories about interacting with "forest people".

 

http://weekinweird.com/2013/02/25/clear-face-bigfoot-screens-secretive-sasquatch-project-leak/

 

What makes her any different than Dyer or Standing?

 

How is Matilda any different than Hank or Muppet heads!!??

 

Here is what is different.....she is SUPPOSE to a scientist!!! Therefore she should be held to a higher standard than con men. I find it super hard to believe that Melba is a naive, idiot that was duped into all this. I could be wrong about this, but not likely given her actions up to this point.

 

Including her willingness to allow people to take pity on her and her shoddy work and woe is me attitude....,

 

Versus having some backbone as a scientist and standing up and saying " After consulting the most respected primate genetistics on earth, I realize that my study is flawed and my conclusions are wrong....here is why."

 

Instead? Like some high school popularity contest she publicly appeals to people like Hiflier to save her. The meanie heads in academia are after me! Help! Save me! Its a conspiracy! 

 

None of this matters....either we, her, they, us, whomever HAS the goods? OR we dont! And if any of us are caught trying to cash in or make a name for ourselves or dupe the public WITHOUT the goods? I hope they are eviscerated publicly......

 

Its not about belief, its about what we can prove.

 

And if it pisses people off that Melba Ketchum is attacked and her character is called into question? Too dang bad!!! She is reaping what she has sown. 

 

People like her are the exact reason nobody takes this subject seriously. 

 

 

[Twist]

^^^ This right here.  Pretty cut and dry.

[hiflier]

9 minutes ago, norseman said:

And if it pisses people off that Melba Ketchum is attacked and her character is called into question?

 

Pissed off? Nope. Not me. And Dr. Ketchum never reached out or appealed to me for anything and neither has anyone else for that matter. In addition, none of what you said addresses the fact that at this point in time there is no legal battles going on, no proof of intentional hoaxing or deception nor any other nefarious deeds, purposely contrived by her or not. Hoaxing implies intent, deception implies intent. Can you or anyone else prove that there was any intention by Dr. Ketchum to do any of those things? No, you cannot. So all of the venom, all of the foul attitudes, all of the anger and hate bestowed upon her has no basis in fact.

 

We like facts on this Forum. Argue for truth. And dig as far as we can to prove a hoax. You yourself have been stalwart and valuable to everyone here just for that reason. But you can't prove hoaxing on Ketchum's part. So the most reasonable thing is to say there wasn't a hoax, or even an intention to hoax UNTIL YOU FIND OUT OTHERWISE AND CAN PROVE IT. And that goes for everyone else on this Forum as well. The witch hunt and trashing of Melba Ketchum is over unless there is rock solid proof, beyond just opinion, that she did anything underhanded.

 

I can accept naïve and I can accept misinterpreting data even because of a preconceived notion that may or may not be a result of being hosed by others. I don't know either way on that. But until hard proof is found then there should be a truce drawn on Dr. Ketchum- by this community at least. We do not chase shadows here. We look for real answers and in Ketchum's case regarding proof of her intent to deceive? there are no shadows to be had. Go look for yourself but I'm sure that if there was anything in the way of hard evidence showing intentional hoaxing you would have found it, or someone would have, years ago.

 

There is a fine line between suspected hoaxing and proof of intentional hoaxing. It is all of our responsibility to make sure that that line doesn't get blurred. Yes, it's principle, but an extremely important one if we are to maintain this Forum's integrity. Regarding your last comment, no one out there has taken this subject seriously for a long time. Long before Dr. Ketchum was ever heard of. So no more scapegoating, calling her a nut case or anything else. She made mistakes, yes, but nothing concrete that would, or should, damn her the way that she's been damned.

[norseman]

Is Rick Dyer being sued? Todd Standing?

 

Moot point.

 

And she appeals to you in her vlogs and website!!!! Everyone can see she has. I never said it was personal.

 

And I dont really care about if you do or dont think she is a fraud because of hoaxing. 

 

Its a fact her project is horrifically flawed. And that not only does it not prove Bigfoot? It has set this subject back years.....

 

FACT.

 

 

[Twist]

1 hour ago, norseman said:

Bill Munns broke Matilda as a hoax. Ketchum was directly involved with the Erickson project and told quite a few stories about interacting with "forest people".

 

http://weekinweird.com/2013/02/25/clear-face-bigfoot-screens-secretive-sasquatch-project-leak/

 

What makes her any different than Dyer or Standing?

 

 

Whats your take the hiflier in regards to Ketchum being involved with the Erickson Project and interacting with “forest people”?

[norseman]

 

Does she have anymore proof of the dogman than bigfoot!?

 

How bout this one?

 

 

Using Matilda to sell her "genome project" on Fox news........ huh.

Edited October 24, 2017 by norseman

[hiflier]

43 minutes ago, norseman said:

Is Rick Dyer being sued? Todd Standing?

 

Nope. But they were also proved hoaxers. Ketchum is not a proved hoaxer and that's the point and the difference.

 

43 minutes ago, norseman said:

And I dont really care about if you do or dont think she is a fraud because of hoaxing

 

Haven't found any evidence of it.

43 minutes ago, norseman said:

Its a fact her project is horrifically flawed. And that not only does it not prove Bigfoot? It has set this subject back years.....

 

FACT

 

Doesn't make her a hoaxer.

 

FACT.

 

42 minutes ago, Twist said:

Whats your take the hiflier in regards to Ketchum being involved with the Erickson Project and interacting with “forest people'?

 

Again, doesn't make or prove she's a knowingly hoaxed, or practiced to deceive, or defrauded, anyone. Nothing from any angle has proved that she was a hoaxer or did any of those things. There were problems in the data (it will take years to go through all of the data BTW) and the interpretation of the data, but that is not hoaxing and no one can prove it was. Mis-interpreting data doesn't automatically imply or translate into any intention to be unethical. Nor does a claim to interact with "forest people".

 

I've gone over this point many times now and I hope it's starting to sink in.

Edited October 24, 2017 by hiflier