Guest Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 The DNA acts much different then all other DNA in the world, thus a project we thought would take 4-6 months has trailed into three years. This doesn't even make sense to me. DNA is DNA. It should act the same in plankton as it does in dogs as it does in fish as it does in us. Obviously the DNA carries a different blueprint for each species and individual. But it still operates the same (as far as I was aware). Why would one species on the whole planet have "different" DNA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 This doesn't even make sense to me. DNA is DNA. It should act the same in plankton as it does in dogs as it does in fish as it does in us. Obviously the DNA carries a different blueprint for each species and individual. But it still operates the same (as far as I was aware). Why would one species on the whole planet have "different" DNA? You've gotta account for the mindspeak, natch! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted July 13, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted July 13, 2011 Hey, I just report the news here......personally just glad to hear they "have" dna of any sort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nona Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 This doesn't even make sense to me. DNA is DNA. It should act the same in plankton as it does in dogs as it does in fish as it does in us. Obviously the DNA carries a different blueprint for each species and individual. But it still operates the same (as far as I was aware). Why would one species on the whole planet have "different" DNA? I agree with you. I think if someone where to take everything we've heard so far about this project and put it all together it would make for a good science fiction flick. "Bigfoot the Alien" ...coming to a theater near you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 This doesn't even make sense to me. DNA is DNA. It should act the same in plankton as it does in dogs as it does in fish as it does in us. Obviously the DNA carries a different blueprint for each species and individual. But it still operates the same (as far as I was aware). Why would one species on the whole planet have "different" DNA? The Erickson Project will verify both Bigfoot and Eric Von Daniken? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 The Erickson Project will verify both Bigfoot and Eric Von Daniken? No. Neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Mulder, Come now, you have to be fair if you want the other side to be fair. Lead by example. Don't patronize me, gigantor. I don't appreciate it. Simply pointing out the bad reputation of the lab in question, as documented by the BBB is not biased or an attempt to damage the future findings of said lab. It is what it is, a bad track record. 18 complaints for a company with a significant history, which appear to be mainly "where are my results" type complaints, rather than ones of shoddy quality or fraud is NOT a "bad track record". As I stated, ANY company is going to draw an occasional complaint. It's the nature of business. Trying to tear down the results on the basis of these complaints is whats UNfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Actually, it was 19 complaints. And that number is quite significant for a small business. To put that into perspective, Coca-Cola Company Headquarters has had 84 complaints within the past 3 years, with a BBB rating of B+. And it does indeed appear that DNA Diagnostics "has a problem." Here's the breakdown of DNA Diagnostics: I've frequented the BBB on numerous occasions investigating the backgrounds of those I intend to do business with (as any informed consumer should do), and 19 complaints reflects very poorly upon that particular business. Not to mention, 8 unresolved and 10 serious complaints, which is a huge contributing factor to the BBB rating of, "F". It's common business practice to investigate a business's BBB rating/accreditation prior to conducting business with them. Why persons would want to conduct business with someone who has a BBB rating of "F" is beyond me. Unless, of course, the person involved is biased towards (or employed by) the business. I read through some of those "serious complaints"... and "unresolved" complaints and read what the company did to try to resolve them. It's not the company's fault if the customer refuses to be reasonable or clings to a position they have been notified is not tenable. My reading of the record shows a company that sometimes gets backed up, and as a result is late with completing the work. Nothing in the report bodies indicates that the problem has anything to do with the quality of their technical analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 I read her business reviews and to say the least, I'm totally shocked. What does that rating mean about the reality of the samples sent to her, and the follow-up peer review? This ranking among her *peers* does not bode well for us at all. I thought that she at least had an upstanding reputation for her work and the reliability of it! Yikes Thrice!! This is dreadful news. Relax, SS...the BBB has nothing to do with the science of genetics, but rather the business end of the operation. DNA Diagnostics appears to have a slight problem getting it's work out on schedule (which conforms quite handily with the timeline on this project unfortunately). NOTHING has been demonstrated to show that their DNA analyses are of poor quality, or that Dr Ketchum's credentials in DNA analysis are in question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 If I'm not mistaken Einstein spent much of his life in Europe hounded by creditors. And couldn't balance a simple checkbook apparently. This tempest in a teapot is noting more than a Skeptic pre-emptive "well poisoning" attempt. Ignore it and wait for published results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Just speculating here (this is a bigfoot forum after all) but what if she's having problems getting the paper peer reviewed? Perhaps some scientists are leery of attaching themselves to a paper purporting to prove the existence of sasquatch - even if the science seems solid. Again, idle speculation on my part. Wouldn't be the first time. Dr Meldrum has run into that exact phenominon several times with colleagues. He talks about it in his book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Maybe they're thinking if they collect enough bits and pieces they'll be able to put together a Frankensquatch. They would have had it but Bobo dropped the brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted July 14, 2011 BFF Patron Share Posted July 14, 2011 ....put together a Frankensquatch. They would have had it but Bobo dropped the brain. Better to drop some I guess...... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0_1F0_20mE&feature=player_detailpage#t=24s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQ_pKqiB5Rg&feature=player_detailpage#t=4s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LAL Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Relax, SS...the BBB has nothing to do with the science of genetics, but rather the business end of the operation. DNA Diagnostics appears to have a slight problem getting it's work out on schedule (which conforms quite handily with the timeline on this project unfortunately). NOTHING has been demonstrated to show that their DNA analyses are of poor quality, or that Dr Ketchum's credentials in DNA analysis are in question. I'm wondering if she was supposed to reply to complaints by saying she's sorry she's late with results but she's been up to her ears analyzing sasquatch DNA? If she'd analysed someone's horse's DNA and it came back "cat" I might be worried. Why would one customer need DNA for a horse sale anyway? Question of paternity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitakaze Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 And couldn't balance a simple checkbook apparently. This tempest in a teapot is noting more than a Skeptic pre-emptive "well poisoning" attempt. Ignore it and wait for published results. Craig Woolheater is a skeptic? http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/erickson-project-news-5/comment-page-1/#comment-71472 Funny, as the owner of Cryptomundo and a former member of the Texas Bigfoot Research Conservancy who himself claims a Bigfoot sighting, I would not have considered him to be a skeptic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts