Guest Particle Noun Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 (edited) Nope on today: http://www.newswise.com/articles/diversity-aided-mammals-survival-over-deep-time?ret=/articles/channels&channel=10&category=feature&page=1&search[status]=3&search[sort]=date+desc&search[channel_id]=10 And based on this from Dr. Ketchum's FB page just posted, I have zero hopes this will come out soon. I think I give up, until it's released. I'd really like Robert LIndsey to be right, and I don't like that I feel that way! lol. Just so you all know, I can't think of anything in the gossip mills of late that is correct in assessing the paper or its status or for that matter, me personally or what I say or do. The old untruths just continue to recycle. It is not worth a response and I will continue to let all these people think what they want. They don't know me and I don't know them so the really important thing is the publishing of the paper. Not a single other thing is important other than protecting them as soon as the paper is out. Edited April 23, 2012 by Particle Noun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 http://www.sadtrombone.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Now she's posting stick structure photos -__- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Particle Noun Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Oh no....she mentions seeing a family of five in the comments for that picture. *sigh* AND says she didn't take a camera, as she would never see them if she took a camera. Talk about handing your critics a loaded .45. I still believe (yes, it's nothing but faith at this point) that the study is real, and will be interesting and exciting, but this really isn't doing anything for her cause. And, from her postings, that doesn't seem to bother her, although "the lady doth protest too much" does tend to come to mind. Still on board, but it's getting a leeeeeeetle harder.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FuriousGeorge Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Still on board, but it's getting a leeeeeeetle harder.... Indeed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Oh no....she mentions seeing a family of five in the comments for that picture. *sigh* AND says she didn't take a camera, as she would never see them if she took a camera. Talk about handing your critics a loaded .45. I still believe (yes, it's nothing but faith at this point) that the study is real, and will be interesting and exciting, but this really isn't doing anything for her cause. And, from her postings, that doesn't seem to bother her, although "the lady doth protest too much" does tend to come to mind. Still on board, but it's getting a leeeeeeetle harder.... Agreed with everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Particle Noun Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Ooop. She has video...which she will show after the paper releases. This is either the hugest tease and hoax, or the eruption of this phenomena into acceptability. Hard to stake a middle ground at this point. But, unless the paper is going to be released soon, all of these teases will just drive people to eat their own.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 (edited) Michael Cremo, the 'Forbidden Archeologist', terms this curious phenomenon of denial, 'knowledge filtering', whereby the dominant hegemony of scientific belief forces the dismissal of any data that gets in the way of their preconceived notions; and in so doing maintains the status quo, regardless of sometimes overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Ya, ain't science great whenever there is money, status and prestige at risk? - Dudlow funny isnt it dudlow, how that seems to work. sort of an ivy league version of the "good ol' boys club" i suppose. makes you wonder if very many interesting discoveries get passed by because of the potential for that mindset to be there but as far as this study/paper.....the slope seems to be getting slippery.cant help but think "here we go again" Edited April 23, 2012 by slicktrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gigantor Posted April 23, 2012 Admin Share Posted April 23, 2012 Oh no....she mentions seeing a family of five in the comments for that picture. We need Tracker on the case. He can see them better than anyone here. I bet you she missed the sentries guarding the little ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jodie Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 I feel like I just took a left turn into Who-ville. The Mayor of Who-ville: Horton is a giant elephant in the sky! [Everyone looks up] The Mayor of Who-ville: . Don't bother looking, he's invisible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Narration: Jerrywayne's tactical officer reports: "Deflector shields failing! We can't take another shot like that!" I will (once again) point out what you continue to deliberately ignore: every encounter is unique, a once-in a lifetime confluence of time, space, and circumstances. What one person sees or doesn't see in one place at one time is not impacted by what any other person sees or doesn't see at any other place and time. The ONLY time what the second person sees or doesn't has ANY relevance whatsoever is in the case that they are in the SAME place and time as the first person. Narration: Mulder's logic torpedo strikes, punching a hole in Jerrywayne's deflectors and striking directly amidships. Consoles explode. Crew go flying every which way. Jerrywayne looks around his shattered bridge at the smoke and carnage. Over a speaker, and incoming transmission from Mulder crackles. Mulder: "Jerrywayne, your power systems are off-line. Your life support is failing. I am willing to discuss terms of your surrender." Jerrywayne, please tell me that you understand you cannot say there is no evidence of bf being shot when bf have been reported shot. Reports ARE evidence. Mulder, Happy to see you have a sense of humor. Concerning your last statement: Do you equate "reported shot" with confirmed kill? Do you understand that "reported shot" may be believed or not believed and a "confirmed kill" offers no such options? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 At this point, does anyone think that any of the dozens of sample submitters might want to consider sending Dr. Melbafooty a private message that would be the equivalent of a hook that yanks someone off stage?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 I agree this thread is not the place, but your hypothetical is limited. You seem to project your psyche into an encounter, and how you would react as a basis for the not "deep stuff," I think it is a mistake to decide how others should handle a "wild animal encounter" and it's aftermath (also, that is a minimizing word choice; that kind of choice reveals the lack of knowledge and/or empathy many display when they reject personal witness.-even extrinsic evidence...as misidentification or hoaxing). One should accept a witness testimony of the impact to their life. If you disregard even that , then you are just. . . ...well, probably not in a long term marriage! (j/k but that is marriage counseling 101...how to listen! ) But, you also neglect several of the most important parts of the witness experience: other humans and their reactions, as well as an official "they don't exist" world. Perhaps Jerry you just have to experience that downside , from a personal encounter with Sasquatch to being a forthcoming, sincere, reliable witness to really get it. - or start a thread to discuss in detail, and many of us may help illuminate that for you.. You also neglect the other element I mentioned, the desire to know more (which sends some of us to forums like this endure the less informed in hopes that some more answers are forth coming). It also drives many of us to lay hope in the Study and a willingness to entertain the idea it shall be solid science and a reliable source of information. If it isn't, well that's the way it will be then, and we can start a new thread on other's efforts at DNA analysis.... . Respect accepted. apehuman, Heavy stuff, slightly personally insulting (but what the hey). I'll be plain speaking. When sasquatch stories began to catch on in the 1950s, sightings such as alleged by Roe and even kidnapped Ostman, the reports were matter of fact and not overtly emotional. Most reports over the years have been matter of fact and apart from initial fear or excitement or awe, seem to relate to the surprise finding of an unknown animal. However, in recent years something else has entered the phenomena. It has become a self-stated life-altering event to see a sasquatch. It is an emotional infliction. It is a quasi-mystical occurrence. As you say yourself, we are no longer suppose to question sightings; we need instead only to empathize with the fragile personal fracture caused by seeing a sasquatch and suffering the consequences. I contend something is up with this development or trend and I don't think it really has that much to do with seeing Wood Apes or Forest People. We see parallel developments in UFO encounters or religious visions for instance. Ooop. She has video...which she will show after the paper releases. This is either the hugest tease and hoax, or the eruption of this phenomena into acceptability. Hard to stake a middle ground at this point. But, unless the paper is going to be released soon, all of these teases will just drive people to eat their own.... P N, I'll still hold to the middle ground. Waiting is not an issue with me. But Dr. Ketchum's comments are sometimes questionable. We will see how it all shakes out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Some people do attach a deeper meaning to everything. When I saw what I did outside Seligman, AZ, I would describe it like seeing this 8 x 8 Bull Elk I walked up on in Munds Park just outside of Flagstaff, only 500 times more awesome. But I didn't get these feelings like I encountered Jesus or Chuck Norris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairy Man Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Chuck Norris would have punched the bigfoot in the face and bigfoot would have said "thank you!" (well, more like grunted in appreciation than actual talking...) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts