Guest Bipedal Ape Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 im guessing human dna with blobsquatch video evidence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 I suppose anything about bigfoot can seem fishy to some people,kind of like playing poker, but having proof of them would be a powerful hand to hold in this card game with skeptics. If you were holding the royal flush, would you worry about your opponent reading or misreading a tell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest exnihilo Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Actually Melba is Sally much of the time, at least on the Dr. Melba Ketchum page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Huh? Melba and Sally are the same person? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 For him and others that raises some questions that's all. Yes. Think of it this way... Two people are standing on the stage, each with the same documentation in their hand. Let's call them... oh... Sally and Ray. Sally raises the document skyward, and speaking to the audience says: "This is the documentation regarding peer-review, confidentiality, and pre-publicity for a paper submitted to Nature. If you read the documentation, you'll see that certain information about the paper cannot be released because the journal will not allow that." The audience rises in a thundering ovation, clapping and hoorahing Sally's words. After everyone has settled down, Ray raises the very same document skyward, and speaking to the audience says: "This is the documentation regarding peer-review, confidentiality, and pre-publicity for a paper submitted to Nature. If you read the documentation, you'll see that there are provisions for releasing a pre-submission version or the original submitted version of the paper, because the journal will allow that." There are immediate cat-calls of "Cynic!", "Skeptic!", and "A-Hat!", from the audience, and tomatoes arc through the air towards Ray. See the difference? RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 @southernyahoo very well said. You have to love the analogy that it's taking to long so it's fake, it's like my 8 year old son saying " ahhh!! will never get there! we might as well go home, the movie will be over because of the super long red light ! " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) I suppose anything about bigfoot can seem fishy to some people,kind of like playing poker, but having proof of them would be a powerful hand to hold in this card game with skeptics. If you were holding the royal flush, would you worry about your opponent reading or misreading a tell Wow not sure you could picked a worse analogy LOL Or a bluff Edited February 22, 2012 by Cervelo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest exnihilo Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Huh? Melba and Sally are the same person? Sally is helping to administer the "Dr. Melba Ketchum" page for Melba, so when Sally posts information there as admin, it appears as "Dr. Melba Ketchum". Since they both post there, Sally has resorted to identifying herself whenever she answers a question. At least that is how it appears to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Where do we get this idea that this is going to be on all of the network news. I have seen nothing that suggests this is going to occur. This paper has not been accepted for publication by a scientific journal. That is a fact. Here is another fact. There has been a concerted effort through leaks and misinformation to hype this paper. My favorite is Dr. Ketchum being flown off to Europe. The implication that the folks at Nature or Max Plank institute where stunned and shocked by the paper. This was a complete fiction. Who made this up and why? It was stated several places as fact several months ago that the paper has been accepted for publication and will be published soon. Again, this was a complete fiction. Who made it up and why? I predicted that this thread would reach a 100 pages before anything is published. It looks like I am getting close. Can we come to an agreement that after 200 pages on this thread without ;publication that we will shut down this thread and discuss the topic no longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) If this thread goes a 1,000 pages before the paper is published, it's still a meaningless metric. Edited February 22, 2012 by slimwitless done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 This thread will live on in perpetuity. At least that is what it is going to feel like as we are awaiting this data that is, as Melba put it, "amazing and beautiful and all cutting edge." Now, that's scientific for ya, heh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mitchw Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) I predict a press conference on a future Thursday afternoon in Washington DC, where Science Magazine is edited and published every Friday. Below is the embargo policy for Science; link http://www.sciencema...s/embargo.xhtml Our embargo policy for original research papers -- which is designed to ensure broad and accurate coverage of author contributions in the press -- can be briefly summed up as follows: No news coverage of the paper can appear anywhere before 2:00 p.m. Eastern U.S. Time on the Thursday before the paper's publication. (Science is published each Friday, except for the last Friday of the calendar year.) Scientists are welcome to present the results of their upcoming papers at professional meetings to colleagues. If the paper has been accepted for publication, authors are asked to inform the AAAS News and Information office that they are planning to make such a presentation. Comments to press reporters attending your scheduled session at a professional meeting should be limited to clarifying the specifics of your presentation. In such situations, we ask that you do not expand beyond the content of your talk or give copies of the paper, data, overheads, or slides to reporters. Scientists with papers pending at Science should not give interviews on the work until the week before publication, and then only if the journalist agrees to abide by the Science embargo. Please do not participate in news conferences until after 1:00 p.m. Eastern U.S. Time the day before publication. I have nothing to do with the Ketchum paper or Science Magazine. Edited February 22, 2012 by mitchw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest exnihilo Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Ray, you are ignoring both the NDA (which differs from the guidelines you are citing) and also the possibility that the substance of the paper may have changed materially during the review process. In either case, there could be no pre-release of information. Plus, there are a number of easily surmised pragmatic reasons to release everything all at once. Regarding your 'victimization': what's not to like about speculative accusations made in ignorance regarding the character of people who do not appear able to defend themselves. In fact it's downright noble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Unfortunately, people sometimes state their opinions as facts. They sometimes state other people's opinions as fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 Where do we get this idea that this is going to be on all of the network news. I have seen nothing that suggests this is going to occur. This paper has not been accepted for publication by a scientific journal. That is a fact. Here is another fact. There has been a concerted effort through leaks and misinformation to hype this paper. My favorite is Dr. Ketchum being flown off to Europe. The implication that the folks at Nature or Max Plank institute where stunned and shocked by the paper. This was a complete fiction. Who made this up and why? It was stated several places as fact several months ago that the paper has been accepted for publication and will be published soon. Again, this was a complete fiction. Who made it up and why? I predicted that this thread would reach a 100 pages before anything is published. It looks like I am getting close. Can we come to an agreement that after 200 pages on this thread without ;publication that we will shut down this thread and discuss the topic no longer. Where do you get off making absolute statements like this? Are you making a point by purposely making statements you could never back up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts