The Ketchum Report

[Guest]

Wow, thank you for the personal hand up Really, thank you - I needed that!. Of course i have to ask, what forums do you visit? Maybe I have been too myopic lately ... duh.

You are right about Sykes/Oxford and I hope the work is available soon, but since the goal now is peer-review...perhaps a year out? No matter really, as any capital I had with those close to me i spent on this other study, so mum I shall be until that date! Hoping anyway.

Edited January 20, 2013 by apehuman

[Guest slimwitless]

The article referencing WTC is titled "Issues and Strategies in the DNA Identification of World Trade Center Victims" and does not list Ketchum as an author.

There are a few mildly interesting things concerning the co-authors on the paper Ketchum actually worked on.

Robert Pomeroy, George Duncan, Bulbin Sunar-Reeder, Elen Ortenberg, Melba Ketchum, Hannah Wasiluk, Dennis Reeder • A Low-Cost, High-Throughput, Automated Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Assay for Forensic Human DNA Applications

Hannah Wasiluk used to be listed on the "staff" link (together with Ketchum) for the DNA Diagnostics web site. At some point her picture and bio were removed. I have no idea if she's still working for DNA Diagnostics.

Also...

Stubstad claimed he suggested to Ketchum that a particular geneticist on the team be named lead author on the paper. He said Ketchum angrily rejected the idea and not long after both Stubstad and the geneticist left the project. In case you're wondering, the geneticist in question is another one of the co-authors listed above. Her name is Bulbin Sunar-Reeder.

[Guest]

I spend time at several forums that interest me RC forums , aviation forums . I have one real bad habit left . I love to fly cartoon WWII fighters so I spend a fair amount of time at Aces High II .

[Guest reelback]

Apehuman I understand how you feel . I to had high hopes for this study . If you think the people that don't believe/know are irritating on this forum , try a forum very removed from the subject . When it is brought up there it enough to make a person unhinged .The best part of the naysayers here is they are informed as well as we are on the subject . IMHO opinion all that separates us from them is a personal experience . Don't get too down . The information I have found about MK's integrity makes any hope of results from her study , a bad bet imho . Look at the Sykes study instead . The only reason I visit this thread from time to time is to read your posts . I admire the way you think . I also admire your sense of honor . There are even times I feel guilty for all of the lawyer jokes I tell .

Me too, but this just gets too wierd to bother with hope.

As I've made an exploration into this BF community, I'm left feeling as if I've gone out of my way to witness a car accident and left wishing I had better judgement. Just watch Phil's Parabreakdown videos (pretty sharp guy, btw) to see what foolishness people are up to.

This topic of BF seems to attract some unseemly characters, I struggle to understand just what on earth there really is to gain with any of this fooling around? Does anyone really belive some fake video is going to make you rich? Are people desperate to make fun of this topic? Get attention from a few thousand people? Get you chicks?? I'm at a loss to understand this other than BF just attracts crazy people which makes me want to go take a look in the mirror.

Mind you, the folks here are great. And there seems to be genuine interest in separating BS from what's real, but we just seem flooded with BS and wading thru it just gets frustrating and old.

This thread exposes this in all its flavors. Can anyone honestly say they have any clue what's going on here? Its one rumor mixed with a fact, mixed with another rumor mixed with a fake story mixed with Lindsay 'sources' and 'leaks' and then MK making odd statements, promises, he said she said, Bigfoot steak, real estate, home offices and Russian journals that you can't determine whether she contradicts herself or not because you can't wade thru this mess and determine where anything originated anymore.

And then I wonder if this thread is just seeding more confusion and she should be left alone and if science emerges it should be judged on that basis and not the rumor mill. In our desire to prove this species exists, we seem to be our own worst enemy sometimes.

Edited January 20, 2013 by reelback

[Guest]

prygundewd - ha! Now I am thinking, have you mounted a minicam on any, and taken out in the forest searching for our Bigfoots? I just watched some FPV (acronym for first person view?) videos of a helicopter, but it seemed the ranges in the 300 yard plus category with $2K type price tags. The mini cam stuff is getting so affordable and software friendly....hummm.... and, clearly I am still myopic on this topic! But, i do think the right sized model with the right mobility and video tech could produce some interesting stuff, especially rock shelter and cliff investigation that are beyond my physical range.....

Nice post reelback. On the third concern, I think here there is a sorting out that is more balanced than any bloggers site, as the many moderate each other, and the arbitrary banning, or overflow of Anons is at least eliminated.

on the increased hoaxing and popularity of the subject (or is still the same percent, just more people?) I am baffled by it as well. But, it is possible that will be eliminated with Sykes' determination, either through regulation or that BFs don't exist....?!!! But, the race to First will be over, maybe.

Edited January 20, 2013 by apehuman

[Guest VioletX]

IMHO, and this is just how I am reading posts from the Ketchum world, is that a week or so ago there was some excitement, meaning that the Journal has accepted.

Now it is quiet because they are waiting to hear when it will be published and do not want to hazard a guess, and I think they are hoping it is within this month.

They are also quiet because everything they talk about is in one blog or another minutes later.

[Guest reelback]

Nice post reelback. On the third concern, I think here there is a sorting out that is more balanced than any bloggers site, as the many moderate each other, and the arbitrary banning, or overflow of Anons is at least eliminated.

on the increased hoaxing and popularity of the subject (or is still the same percent, just more people?) I am baffled by it as well. But, it is possible that will be eliminated with Syke's determination, either through regulation or that BFs don't exist....?!!! But, the race to First will be over, maybe.

TY

I agree, I seem to have found my way here because we do challenge and self moderate each other.

Your last paragraph makes me revisit a thought that has crossed my mind a few times before which I never took very seriously. What happens after proof is established? I'm beginning to believe the BF is going to get terrorized. Just look at Spike TV, 10m for a dead one. What next? Tourism, anthropology, ya, but the scary ones are the bravado types that want to brag they killed one.

Look what happened to American Indians.

[Guest]

IMHO, and this is just how I am reading posts from the Ketchum world, is that a week or so ago there was some excitement, meaning that the Journal has accepted.

Now it is quiet because they are waiting to hear when it will be published and do not want to hazard a guess, and I think they are hoping it is within this month.

They are also quiet because everything they talk about is in one blog or another minutes later.

That would be awesome, and it is a logical explanation.

TY

I agree, I seem to have found my way here because we do challenge and self moderate each other.

Your last paragraph makes me revisit a thought that has crossed my mind a few times before which I never took very seriously. What happens after proof is established? I'm beginning to believe the BF is going to get terrorized. Just look at Spike TV, 10m for a dead one. What next? Tourism, anthropology, ya, but the scary ones are the bravado types that want to brag they killed one.

Look what happened to American Indians.

I used to think that protection would be an easy consensus, however that played out (research and policy, all in time OK) and it would still mean we would not repeat the sins of our past, that we would act judiciously and speedily in case they are endangered. We all love Sasquatch! But, now I wonder actually, it seems we don't.

And we may not be capable of studying them so effectively, or implementing what we learn appropriately for a bio-diverse future planet. In the mean time events like the bounty hunt and sensational bloggers flourish, or the hoaxes, and they might drive the public/institutions away as well as witnesses and potential researchers. .

On the other hand, if those who are serious, or witnesses, or property owners, or critical thinkers, abandon the online forums in disgust or guilt it would be worse, as the field would really be given over to the extreme of even the BF enthusiast extreme! One might argue serious researchers have a responsibility to engage in that BF community discourse online. I think however, more recede into smaller groups and our collective plight continues.

Edited January 20, 2013 by apehuman

[bipedalist]

IMHO, and this is just how I am reading posts from the Ketchum world, is that a week or so ago there was some excitement, meaning that the Journal has accepted.

Now it is quiet because they are waiting to hear when it will be published and do not want to hazard a guess, and I think they are hoping it is within this month.

They are also quiet because everything they talk about is in one blog or another minutes later.

And thus came the saying..... quiet as a church-mouse in a house of Ketchum. LOL.

Edited January 20, 2013 by bipedalist

[Guest]

Ape- If I got you right you are saying that protection would just spur on malicious individuals to the harm of BF.? In case of protection, protection covers an array of issues pretaining to a states stewardship of its natural resourses(and I know the questionable status of personage would still need to be determined also) but for time sakes lets just say that BF would be verified and the process of regulatory preamiters were established for the Bf. # 1 is

that BF would undobtedly be put on the endangered or protected list and that sets off a lot of restrictions in the field as far as research goes, and that also variws from state to state and/or just implimented restrictions by the US governmental agencies. In California, to researck and endangered animal you need to obtain a special permit(w/ fees and credentials) to study the subject. An approved plan prior to field work would be OKed and guidelines as far as NO harrassment or altering enviornment. Also all study work might have to be reviewed and shared. #2 Most certainly there would need to be or already a mechanizum that establishes penalties and stiff fines or jail time for violations. I know in California a new bill was passed that raised the fine for poaching a bear from $10,000. to $40,000. so those violations are highly considered in my state per say. #3 hunting regulations for BF would IMHO be an emergency concern here due to the fact that we have some folks that have zero qualms about shooting a Bigfoot and has happened in the past so

that a hunting regulation would need to be odopted asap.#4 The general public and hunters would need to be educated and IMo a Public Sevice Announcement would seem to be the best way to inform everyone; of course if verification would happen. And then #5, and I am not getting into this one, is Classification. Field Research is not physically possible for me but it would seem that experienced field researchers or habituators would be needed to assit scientisits (social anthropologists) in the field for studys. This is all briefs outline and mostly my perception as far as I have gotten in my studies but not without a lot of time looking into possible processes and talking to folks on the phone and corresponding.

Can I just say that I am very proud of the members on this board who have not left any stone unturned that they could regardless of the stance and/ or opinions and I may not agree with everyone but then agian I am not in anyway a expert, just a concerned enthusiast just like everyone here. I still think about the encounters our family experienced over 5 years over 50 years ago and it leaves me wondering and am prosuing the wonder of it all. %0 years, so this time frame of the Ketchum report is just relive to me; just it will happen when it happens.

[Guest]

I am proud of your post and plussed. I like to think that is the track things will take with proof. And one darn good peer-review paper might initiate that process in some agencies, or among active citizens.

I think the Ketchum group will be posting a protection site and this pronged approach seems appropriate for that effort.

I am sorry i sound so negative today on the response from society/Gov, but I guess I have been somewhat awakened by the internet arguments on this topic.

You are right, we are in a vacuum of professional research/guidance, and hopefully that will change soon. Your contribution is a concrete and tangible beginning, hello!

Edited January 20, 2013 by apehuman

[Guest]

Ape- I tottaly understand the frustsration in this everlonging protraction of the Ketchum study, I am trying to be patient and keep reminding myself that the timeframe is out of my hands tottaly so that helps me for one. We all are just prodding along this road togeather and with the experiences aforementioned

and commaradery I can put things into a proper perspective. BTW, it has been good to hear/ read also your experiences and that gives me for one a little more confidence that there just might be a few more in this big tree. I am thinking after the superbowl lol.

[Guest]

I know this has been talked about ad nauseam, but could someone refresh me. For the submitters of DNA samples, how many retain additional portions? How many also submitted to Sykes? Besides the Sierra kills sample, samples, have any of these been tested outside of Ketchum's study? I know she claims a dozen indepedent labs are doing blind tests, but I hope that since the provenance of some of these samples are supossed to be good, there is a chance for future testing.

[Guest Darrell]

So maybe Melba Ketchum lied about working on identifying WTC victims (no proof of that yet), does that make her bigfoot research invalid? She may be a horrible person for all you know, or she may be an absolute angel, either way, who cares? Is it a requirement that someone lives up to your moral standards for you to accept their research? Or are the A's, C's, G's, and T's all the same regardless of who is working on them?

Isn't that what makes science great? Her study is going to be exposed as legit or phoney and there is no in between.

Actually I think it does. She has displayed an uncommon ammount of behaviour that reflects on her integrity. When is everyone going to wise up and know there is no study. Quit making excuses and move on.

[Guest]

I see what you're saying. Her intergrity may be shot, but isn't a study with verifiable, repeatable evidence still possible? Not saying it's gonna happen, but I would think the content of her character wouldn't change the make up of the saliva on Derek Randle's game cam.