Guest slimwitless Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 What are you guys talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) My turn Missed it by that much Edited February 26, 2012 by will Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest RayG Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) Patience grasshopper. <Swoosh> The pebble is gone!! RayG Edited February 26, 2012 by RayG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SquatchinNY Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 That was perfect. An accidental. *facepalm*. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 It looked like all you could do with that is say what it isn't SY, I guess you could use it by default. Right, you wouldn't rely on short mtDNA sequences to ID a new species, and the bird article also explains why. I'm just showing how little is used to ID knowns, and what a mistake it would be if relied upon to find BF DNA, even though some scientists are using it that way. The barcode method would put you in the right genus for an unknown sample I would expect, but it might leave you with doubt on species level if you weren't prone to make an assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 That was perfect. An accidental. *facepalm*. Accidental? I think not. Anyway, what's all this about a DNA study? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 (edited) What are you guys talking about? They're talking about the number of pages this thread has reached. I'm assuming that the post numbers are off in this thread due to multiple posts being deleted or hidden... Otherwise having 2970 posts on 100 pages seems quite silly... I'd guess about 30 posts got axed which would bring the total up to 3000 even or 30 posts per page.Megatarsal scored the last post on the 99th page, or what should have been the 3k mark. I remember being on another forum where we had a "party" thread that eventually ran past 15k posts. =p Another member brought up an interesting point: is there confirmation that Ketchum's paper has been accepted by a journal? Edited February 26, 2012 by ShadoAngel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Has it been accepted? Here's the latest post from Ketchum's publicist. You decide. The journal is not permitting us to say where we are in the process, so even though we know what's going on, we are in the same boat as everyone else - waiting. And even when we get a pub date, we will be waiting. We're working on the Web site and getting ready, of course. But still, we're ALL waiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bipedal Ape Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Bigfooting: its a waiting game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 (edited) Edited February 27, 2012 by Jodie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 @slimwitless: Wow - that statement makes it sound as if the paper has not - at least not yet - been accepted by the journal to which it's allegedly been submitted. Once a paper has been accepted, it's fairly straightforward for the Editor to determine in which volume it will appear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mitchw Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Perhaps picking the publication date for the Kethchum paper is more complicated because the editor of the journal doesn't want the Bigfoot paper to bigfoot a lot of other worthy articles? (sorry, it was there, and I took it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 I would think that if the paper was in review then a journal has accepted it. Why waist time with review otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JiggyPotamus Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 (edited) Right now I am thinking that the comments from the publicist are somewhat misleading. However I have no proof of this. My gut feeling is that she is making claims that cannot directly be held against her, but are also not the truth. I do not think the paper has been accepted by any journal as of yet, therefore leading us to believe it has been is wrong. I do not know all that much about the process, but from what I have read, apart from comments from the Ketchum camp, this process should have concluded a long time ago, had the paper even been submitted. Again, still an opinion, but I am starting to doubt the entire thing. Although there could be, hypothetically, certain circumstances that prolong the process, I am thinking this would be a precedent...Not sure on that, but from what I have read this could be the case. But then again, this is BIGFOOT, which may be a much more touchy subject for publication, and because of that the timeline may be different. I do not buy that personally, but it is possible. I could be surprised, which would be great, but I for one am going to stop reading "updates". Na, I probably won't, lol. But I should. Edited February 27, 2012 by JiggyPotamus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantor Posted February 27, 2012 Admin Share Posted February 27, 2012 My gut feeling is that she is making claims that cannot directly be held against her, but are also not the truth. I do not think the paper has been accepted by any journal as of yet, therefore leading us to believe it has been is wrong. This is called a Clintonian technique... "it depends what the meaning of is, is". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts