Guest Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Well at least it's not some crappy Russian Journal. I'd like just once for someone to pony up some evidence that Russian scientists are somehow inferior to Western ones. This meme is getting old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 So you've seen the paper and can say (and back up with evidence) with certainty that the data isn't vaild? I await your proffer of proof for that claim. I hope the paper get's published tomorrow. I have know idea if the data is valid, but hope it is. I just know that any mention of Ketchum in that publication is very bad for her already horrible PR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 But that wasn't the paper. its an article about bigfoot that talks about the paper. Doesn't matter...it's close enough for snark, which is the Skeptic stock-in-trade these days it seems. It's not like they have anything else to offer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 I'd like just once for someone to pony up some evidence that Russian scientists are somehow inferior to Western ones. This meme is getting old. Wasn't one noted "Russian scientist" sleeping on Janice Carter's floor for a while? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 So you've seen the paper and can say (and back up with evidence) with certainty that the data isn't vaild? I await your proffer of proof for that claim. Evidence, I don't need no stinking evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Wasn't one noted "Russian scientist" sleeping on Janice Carter's floor for a while? One researcher does not represent the entire Russian scientific community. And what is wrong with a researcher investigating a habituating bigfoot report? Isn't that the whole point of this endeavor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Wasn't one noted "Russian scientist" sleeping on Janice Carter's floor for a while? Are you reading my mind LTBF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 So you've seen the paper and can say (and back up with evidence) with certainty that the data isn't vaild? I await your proffer of proof for that claim. I'm still waiting on your proof that it is valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 I'd like just once for someone to pony up some evidence that Russian scientists are somehow inferior to Western ones. This meme is getting old. Not picking on you Mulder but there is some question about the equality of the educational background between PhD's here versus Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 To ape human I am working on a aircraft type called a slow stick with an fpv camera and a HUD so it wont have to remain in my LOS . I am also using a system with far greater range than 300m . I am getting about 7km on my ground tests right now Reelback I try to think her personal integrity should not matter . My problem is that my life experience shows that it always matters . On the plane stuff, very interesting and I would like to see more, or resulting video if you post somewhere. On your life experience: that is mine as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 What an incredible joke this whole Ketchum thing has become. Any sense of dignity of this paper has been reduced to a comedy routine. Killed squatches, captured squatches, filmed squatches. Squatches Squatches everywhere, but not a squatch to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 I'm waiting for a picture to surface on Facebook of someone holding a sign saying 'Melba Ketchum told me she'll release her data, and video if I get a million likes.' I wonder if the video she's holding has crystal clear footage of a snipe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ajciani Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 All current generation genome sequencers use "adapter ligation" technology. ... There is no need for primers specific to each species. We can sequence DNA from any critter, plant or microbe. The technology has been around for 5-6 years. I can't think of anyone who uses the old primer method - its time consuming and expensive by comparison. Just about every major genome lab uses the new method. Just more food for thought. The Trent study of the Smeja sample used the good 'ole primer method, so quite clearly, not all of the labs out there are using the new sequencing methods. It seems that many geneticists are still quite unfamiliar with the new methods. If Ketchum used one of the new, high-speed sequencing methods, then this might actually cause a problem with reviewers, because they would be unfamiliar with and possibly doubt the method. Remember, bigfoot does not exist, so any evidence proving that bigfoots exist must be flawed, and what better way to create flawed evidence than to reject it due to your own ignorance. A "primer" is exactly that. All it does is latches onto a short section of known genetic code, and gives the PCR enzymes a place to start replicating DNA. The primer does not change the sequence of the replicated DNA, it just chooses which section of DNA gets replicated. Without the correct primer, it may not be possible to get enough DNA to sequence. The new methods replicate everything and sequence everything. Ketchum does a lot of crime lab work, and to explain how sensitive the new techniques are, likes to tell a story about how she once obtained the genetic sequence of a murder from the carcass of a dog that the murderer killed and buried at the same time as he committed the murders. The carcass had been buried for well over a year. The DNA of the murderer likely came from a few, partially preserved epithelial cells that were rubbed off by the fur of the dog, while the murderer was handling the dog's carcass. If a bigfoot leaves a greasy hand print on a window, get out the cotton swab, scrape it over the oily print, and send it in. It may even be possible to collect DNA from a footprint. There are many geneticists who doubt this kind of sensitivity, because they are only familiar with normal, primer-based PCR. They might accept it to send someone to the electric chair, but would never accept it as proof that bigfoots exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 (edited) Wasn't one noted "Russian scientist" sleeping on Janice Carter's floor for a while? That is "a" scientist. Does he make all Russian science invalid? Do they not have engineers, physicists, geneticists, etc just as we do? I'm still waiting on your proof that it is valid. We will see if/when the data comes out. In the meantime you have no basis for dismissing the study unless you are claiming some sort of "insider" knowledge, in which case you're engaging in the typical "secret squirrel" BS that keeps popping up. Edited January 23, 2013 by Mulder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts