Jump to content

The Ketchum Report


Guest

Recommended Posts

Which group? The ones that migrated from warmer climes in the south? They weren't, but they compensated with skin clothing.

European Neanderthals developed in glacial Europe over several hundred thousand years just as the other native animals did. The author covers this in his presentation.

So ice-age H. sapiens from colder climes were hair covered? Did they shave when traveling closer to the equator?

My point is we do not have any intact Neanderthal bodies, skin, or flesh to indicate their level of hirsute-ness. It is all speculative.

That being said, I vote we stop discussing this in the Ketchum Report thread. There are other, more appropriate places to argue about possible Neanderthal morphology.

Edited by Bonehead74
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Motion Carried.

Lets get back on topic folks ie the Ketchum Report.

Off topic subjects may be edited out.

Thanks

megatarsal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Bipedal Ape

There isn't really anything more that can be said about this report until it comes out. If anything I think this thread should be in the campfire chat section

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest spurfoot

In defense of Melba Ketchum I would like to point out that her report was delayed by an unexpected "curveball" . What was first a reasonable prediction by her of an early publication was thrown off a lot by the need to redo and reevaluate. From what she has said, that reevaluation involved a complete genome measurement and analysis. That is a BIG job. Little wonder that the publication has taken much longer than first expected. I'm glad it happened because a complete genome analysis was needed.

Patience is in order. She says "soon", and there is no reason to doubt it, barring further unexpected events. It is easy to imagine a wide variety of unexpected events beyond her control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BFSleuth

If all you had to do is say you have results without publishing any, then vaporware is a viable analogy. However, software doesn't get published in a journal critiqued by editors and peer reviewers. The analogy doesn't hold water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Peter O.

Even if it's [edit: i.e. the paper] based on airvidence?

Edit: Seriously, though, my analogy was simply referring to the pushing back of release dates. Software has to undergo a Q&A process too before its release. Therefore, I still think my analogy holds.

Edited by Peter O.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest parnassus

In defense of Melba Ketchum I would like to point out that her report was delayed by an unexpected "curveball" . What was first a reasonable prediction by her of an early publication was thrown off a lot by the need to redo and reevaluate. From what she has said, that reevaluation involved a complete genome measurement and analysis. That is a BIG job. Little wonder that the publication has taken much longer than first expected. I'm glad it happened because a complete genome analysis was needed.

Patience is in order. She says "soon", and there is no reason to doubt it, barring further unexpected events. It is easy to imagine a wide variety of unexpected events beyond her control.

Curveballs become a regular part of baseball by the time you're in high school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curveballs become a regular part of baseball by the time you're in high school.

And baseball games end up with a result, this is a never ending saga...I'm starting to lean towards outright rejection of this saga.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, Mulder, I agree that in order for a statement to rise to the level of an opinion it means that it appraises a set of facts. Summitwalker's "opinion" that there can't be 200 samples from 28 specimens because "nobody can prove the existence" of BF doesn't really qualify. It is more a statement of belief that bigfoot CAN'T exist, therefore there CAN'T be evidence. It would follow from his belief that it is therefore useless to look for BF because it doesn't exist, and will reject any evidence because the evidence is .... [fill in the blank].

Except that I never stated that BF did not exist, I just find extremely hard to believe there are 28 specimens collected when there is no evidence otherwise. I suppose you can play the word games but it will still be my belief and my opinion. I do think BF may exist, but only in the PNW and on up, that too is my belief and my opinion...and my theory! :)

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BFSleuth

So then by "Nobody can prove this creature exists" what did you mean? Are you buying into the paranormal BF or something? It lives in another dimension?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so many on here act like a 5 yr old that didn't get the toy they wanted because the store was out of stock, then blows up and

complains they will never get it. but at 5, you understand why they don't have patience....

Edited by zigoapex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Peter O.

Well, I for one can't discount the witness testimony. These people are seeing something. But I can discount a lot of the pareidolia blobsquatches and hoaxes that don't look like a real animal at all. I admit I'm a bit jaded after joining this forum and "researching" on the internet further, but that's only because some of these people are on acid if they think they've videotaped Sasquatch. I hope my cynicism toward a lot of the airvidence (like a steak that evaporates when it's overcooked... ;-) ) doesn't translate into people thinking I'm cynical toward the whole enterprise. Just parts of it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...