Guest Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Why? How could they help with a genetic study? I know I heard mention of wanting a zoologist involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 There are plenty of PHD types paying attention,and the ones I know really do not see the "anomalies" in the process that many skeptics here do. They take in to consideration the nature of the topic, that fact that it is a private study, and are very familiar with the delays, and the secrecy of the project. They find more mystery in some peoples behavior, than they do the process, or delays in the paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masterbarber Posted February 29, 2012 Admin Share Posted February 29, 2012 I don't think you are being jerked around here Christopher, this forum was informed back in the summer 2011 that the paper was submitted and in review through statements from Melba to Steve Kulls.. I don't think Melba would seem so confident if things were not in good order and closer to the endgame. I'll second this, generally. I think from all indications it's clear that Dr. M.K. is convinced there is enough "proof" biologically to acknowledge that BF exists and she has implied as much over the past few weeks. Will any of it fly? That remains to be seen. I also think the release of the documentation is very close because of the increased activity. So, aside from all of these pages full of speculation, we probably don't have long to wait at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 A lot of people come on the BFF and claim to be something they aren't, a lot of bigfoot hoaxing has gone on in the past. I would be dubious of one who accepted this project without questioning regardless of the circumstances. The circumstances of the project will dictate how seriously the results are to be considered. The only Phd that should be mystified by logical questioning of a private DNA study more than likely obtained that degree under questionable circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Its not the logical questioning that mystifies them Jodie, its the lack of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Speaking for myself here John C. I don't do my questioning here, since the ones who know can't answer, and the ones who would don't know. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Southern, don't get me wrong, there is a lot of good discussion here,and I really enjoy reading it, and I have learnt a lot from it. Like everything, you have to take the good with the bad,and kinda sort through it for yourself. I don't know a whole lot about the technical stuff, but I am lucky,and know several people who do, and they are kind enough to patiently walk me through it. Some are skeptical, some are not so skeptical, but they do understand the process thoroughly, and are kind enough to take the time to explain much of it to me. Everyone is anxious, including myself, so of course we all have it on our minds. The interest obviously runs much deeper than internet forum talk, and has attracted followers beyond the usual boundaries of Bigfootry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Why? How could they help with a genetic study? I know I heard mention of wanting a zoologist involved. Anthropology, from Wiki: Anthropology's basic concerns are the definition of human life and origin, how social relations among humans are organized, who the ancestors of modern Homo sapiens are, what the characterizations of human physical traits are, how humans behave, why there are variations among different groups of humans, how the evolutionary past of Homo sapiens have influenced its social organization and culture and so forth. One of the Anthropologists that I communicate with is studying the Denisova DNA for example. He can also tell from a human DNA sequence, how much Neanderthal DNA is in this human sequence. I would think that a claim that Bigfoot DNA is human, would mean that an Anthropologist's services would already have been secured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 See Cryptomundo this am, an article announcing a new peer-reviewed Journal of Cryptozoology. I like that. But, I also wonder if the "Study" shall be the first issue's lead article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) Where on earth are they going to get credible peers to do the reviewing? And if that is the place the Ketchum report does get published, then it's crashed-and-burned, and I'm going back firmly to the sceptics camp. There is something oxymoronic about the idea of a peer-reviewed crypto-zoological journal anyway. As soon as there is accepted peer-reviewed science published about any new creatures, they cease to be "crypto". Mike Edited February 29, 2012 by MikeG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) Sorry I couldn't link/paste article..they have identified the reviewers, you can take alook. I agree if this is the venue it will be less than all hoped for. p.s. I have to believe this journal will publish evidence that falls short of proof, therefore still crypto? Your point is well taken! Edited February 29, 2012 by apehuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) @ Mike G. Edited February 29, 2012 by southernyahoo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted February 29, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) Peer-reviewed journal of cryptozoology, ....... seriously laughable! Edited February 29, 2012 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bipedal Ape Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Lol... well I guess that is one "out" this report has Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgerm Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Peer-reviewed journal of cryptozoology, ....... seriously laughable! Would be quite a let down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts