Guest Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 A couple little points, first,and again, this is a private study, that means someone owns it, and that, ultimately is who would decide when and what the public would know. The scientific side of this, would care little over what people "want" to see,verses what is. I see no reason to believe that if serious scientific minds where involved,and it was a study producing positive results,that it would be in mainstream media by now. I do see reason why it would not be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 Maybe the NDA has something to do with it? Right now it is what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted May 9, 2012 Share Posted May 9, 2012 It would be huge headlines...and if there were legitimate scientific minded folks in the know that this proof was even in the works and forthcoming...it would be out there in the mainstream by now. And report what? Leaks and rumors? Maybe quote Robert Lindsay? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 I could not agree more! But it doesn't matter, there will be nothing conclusive coming out of this paper regarding proof of BF. Besides, DNA related proof would be great, so the world could say 'holly crap, Bigfoot really does exist', but what people really want to see are pictures or a video...which have zip to do with a paper on DNA and for which there is zero reason not to produce...something...anything! But I'm a firm believer that there is no digital evidence...even though people involved with this camp claim to have repeated observations of BF. Skeptical of this paper, but not so much Sasquatch in general! The video you are asking to see is absolutely tied to the DNA study. It has been said by the people holding the footage that they are holding it because they feel it would be considered useless without accompanying DNA from the subjects in the video. It is wise for them to release everything at the same time. Without DNA evidence to go along with the footage, no matter how amazing the footage is, in this era of CGI and the technological ability to doctor footage, there will absolutely be accusations of hoaxing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 I see her stance and efforts pivoting from proving these things are real, to increasing awareness for them and making an effort for protection through law. Just like several other bigfooters have done. Can't prove it, so we'll try to protect them. There must be serious problems with it if it hasn't come out yet. I can understand a week or two to modify the paper. Even a month or more. But over a year now and no indication that it us even close other than "soon." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheellug Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Has it been a year? I thought the first rumors were around August last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Its the leaks and our own speculation that leads to the frustration, but some things are factual. Dr Ketchum , and the people that she is associated with are professionals at what they do. There is money behind this study. There are several clear ties to the Bigfoot community, and evidence it has gathered. There are people here, on this forum, that have provided samples to this study, and continue to adhere to the NDA's they signed. (and good for them for sticking this out). If you have read my posts, you know that I have expressed quite a bit of skepticism regarding this matter. I had previously made some dismissive comments about NDA's that I now wish I would have stated more tactfully. I would like to tip my hat to those who have gone out in the field and gathered samples to be submitted as part of the study. Other than keeping my eyes and ears open when I am out in the woods, I do not do any field work. I am curious if the funding source(s) play a role in acceptance for publication. Would academics at a university conducting a study funded by grants have a better chance at publishing than a privately funded study? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Posted by anonymous: "I just spoke with my contact regarding the paper submitted by Dr. Melba Ketchum and the time has come for this information to be released. First off the paper has a publish date of June 6, 2012- mind you there may be a delay regarding printing the actual hard copies of the journal but this puts the release date at no later than June 11. Having read most of the drafts I can say with 100% certainty that there has been a campaign of disinformation regarding the paper. A person claiming to represent Dr. Ketchum and company often posts here. She does not bring the truth but only thinks she does as the biggest worry of Dr. Ketchum is that non-believers will anticipate the findings and have arguments tailored to refute her findings at the time of publication. It is very important that there is no opportunity for her to look like a fool, so the paper may make the rounds through the scientific community, without any preconceived notions. The person posting here and on other forums is a research assistant at the same lab but assigned to a different project. Her superiors call her “self-important†and they have used this trait as the basis for the disinformation campaign. I can tell you all this. Part of the delay regarding the peer review process has dealt with the integrity of the samples that were tested and how they were collected. For example the Yeti hair purportedly found by Josh Gates has been dismissed and any mention of it removed from the paper. The reason for this being the fact it was discovered in a manner consistent with providing entertainment and not scientific study and research. In addition, a complete step by step depiction of the Sierra Kills incident has been included in the paper. This revision took a great deal of time as the events of that day had to be verified as best they could in order to ensure the integrity of the sample. Any and all illustrations or drawings have been removed- hence the release of sketches through Robert Lindsey (whose writings are mentioned with him be credited in a foot note related to his research on the Sierra Kills incident). The reason being that sketches from memory may have been influenced by fear, excitement and any other number of emotions and a false recollection depicted in a drawing could undermine the entire paper. The question the paper attempts to answer is “does Bigfoot or Sasquatch exist� It does so by showing dna evidence of an unknown primate. The process of elimination and supporting evidence allows the conclusion to be drawn that this unknown primate is in fact Bigfoot. However there exists no proof that Bigfoot or Sasquatch represents the only undiscovered primate. Right now a revision regarding “Flores Man†is the final holdup." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Particle Noun Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Posted where? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Where does this come from Ontariosquatch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 OntarioSquatch, where did you find that post by Anonymous? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Right here http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.ca/2012/05/swamp-squatchers-continues-see-what.html#moretop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisco Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 There's so many rumors flying around that I don't know what to believe. All I know is that I check this thread every Thursday, around this time, with the hope that the paper has been released. That being said, it looks like I'll have to wait another week or maybe June the 11th? It's not the first time that a release date has been "announced" by an anonymous poster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Interesting, but given that this is posted in the comments of a blog by "anonymous" I'm not inclined to give it that much credence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 10, 2012 Share Posted May 10, 2012 Hmm so the next let down date is june 11th. Marking it on my calendar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts