Jump to content

The Ketchum Report


Guest

Recommended Posts

Guest COGrizzly

I had to flip a coin as to whether Inc or bipedalist got the Plus1. Biped got the coin toss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BFF Patron

I had to flip a coin as to whether Inc or bipedalist got the Plus1. Biped got the coin toss.

Times are tough and Inc 1 is usually the man so I feel like I earned one the old fashioned way. Now which post was that? Hahah

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had to flip a coin as to whether Inc or bipedalist got the Plus1. Biped got the coin toss.

It's OK, COGrizzly - I awarded him accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just got off the phone with my bookie. Dropped a few thousand on June 6th.......yeah right. I would wager that "anonymous" that posted the info is RL. Sounds like the flow of his blog updates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the blogspot "anon" post. I doubt that was RL, he has no problem adding his avitar....so, it's one of many who are dissatisified for whatever reasons. It was written to "answer" many hanging questions, and as I recall a bit too contrived, like fiction. Lots of pat answers and pretty odd...down to the "assistant" posting in forums........so, I put it in the ficitional bin....where so much of my BF reading ends up! But, it wouldn't surprise me now, if it were true...either way, pretty much a non-data point at this juncture..

I expect many to pour out this summer, with FLIR rented, and new HD handycams...and sound? LOL...certainly many seem to be planning such....and as long as there is no EP footage or paper....seems for many the race is still on. And maybe some now focused on behavior rather than detection or video? Tough species to study, it would help if we got their permission.

For those into genetics, a recent article in Nature dealing with Pygmy height looked very interesting,as did the genetisicts involved.. alikley crew for this project? I haven't seen or heard any "leaks" about who those co-authors might be.

Edited by apehuman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LTPE?

Had to plus both the follow-up post by bipedalist as well as the one by I-1 as we are all old vets of the forum and went through the previous LongtabberPE debacle.

Dude was the Walter Mitty of our world. Man, he had been there and done everything.

Heck of it was he had just enough knowledge in multiple areas to be overly dangerous and he fooled an awful lot of people. A lot of that can be found in the 1.0 archives that is included in the Premium Membership Plan.

He claimed to be just about anything you could imagine including a highly decorated US military operative.

Then, some folks got to looking at the timing and realized he could not have been where he said he was at the times he said he was. Some Veteran Organizations got involved as they took exception to his baseless claims and viewed them as dishonorable to true *vets* and in conflict with their records.

When all was said and done, this Walter Mitty individual wound up being a chicken farmer from South Carolina. There is a cool conversation about this as well as other individuals who have harmed the subject of BF in the Tar-Pit Forum of the Premium Membership Plan. It has been quite enlightening and funny to hear/read folks speak out about some of those who have/are doing harm to the subject.

Now, chicken farming is an honorable job and one that should be respected. But to have someone like LongtabberPE make the wild claims he made, as others have done, and then be exposed as such will forever rest in the BF Communities *infamy* category.

Especially for us *old-timers* who lived through it.

Back on topic regarding the Ketchum Report I am not really troubled by the delay as I understand lawyers representing at least 3 people/groups are involved and there may be some legal wrangling going on.

Get a bunch of lawyers involved and toss out any expectations of time.

Having said that I'm losing a bit of hope if I'm honest. Not due to the time or delay but due to a growing concern that the report, when/if it comes out will be ambiguous and indefinitive.

If that is the case then it might do more harm than good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BFF Patron

.....For those into genetics, a recent article in Nature dealing with Pygmy height looked very interesting,as did the genetisicts involved.. alikley crew for this project? I haven't seen or heard any "leaks" about who those co-authors might be.

Right --I stuck the reference into an obscure thread that got few hits. It's here though. I do see some ancillary relevance but others would have to make their own conclusions on that.

Edited by bipedalist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BFSleuth

This is a very interesting article regarding outreach by the scientific community, "outreach" meaning reaching out to the public to explain their research findings:

http://bigfootforums.com/index.php?/topic/30871-why-some-scientists-avoid-the-public/

Note that women scientists, especially women with children, tend to reach out to explain their findings to the public more than men. Note also that people within the scientific community that do outreach are looked down upon within the scientific community, the "Sagan Effect".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a very interesting article regarding outreach by the scientific community, "outreach" meaning reaching out to the public to explain their research findings:

http://bigfootforums...oid-the-public/

Note that women scientists, especially women with children, tend to reach out to explain their findings to the public more than men. Note also that people within the scientific community that do outreach are looked down upon within the scientific community, the "Sagan Effect".

That's cuz us girls are usually more touchy-feely. Note: I said usually....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect the answer lies in the fact that the evidence relating to this report does not represent BF, the video and pictures of any BF do not exist, and there will be no conclusive report from this camp. Too bad too, because it would be awesome if I were wrong.

That should read "I suspect the answer lies in my opinion that the evidence...etc" Because that's what that statement above is: you opinion.

It is the fact that one is well documented and repeatedly documentable...while the other...well...not so much!

Argument from acceptance fallacy and circular reasoning. Skeptics will not accept BF is "documented" w/o evidence, but will not consider anything evidence until BF is "documented".

Crowlogic, on 08 May 2012 - 09:42 AM, said:

I am very troubled that Ketchum is claiming to have sightings. Now all of my confidence in the Ketchum Report has been 100% shattered. IMO repeat/frequent sightings are the most suspect of all kinds of sightings. Has anyone ever produced a single shred of verifiable evidence that there is anything to those kinds of claims? Good photo, video will suffice but I fear it'll remain just as it is now....Null Set.

What he said!

So basically you are both committing ad hom. Dr Ketchum's status as an eyewitness in no way impacts her academic and scientific credentials, and to imply otherwise as you have done is highly improper.

Exactly! This would be a huuuuuge deal if it were even remotely possibly true. There is no way an NDA would cut it, especially with the primary researcher making claims like sightings and repeated observations. It is totally beyond believable in my opinion. It is way beyond bigfootery when 'evidence' of another, yet uncatologued higher primate...bipedal at that....may actually exist!

Argument from credulity.

I hate to further compound the problem, but exactly who's vetting would be good enough to declare that it IS actually vetted? You start with some verifiable evidence right? Then throw out the rest?

That is one way to go about examining a suspect dataset. The other way is to process it according to accepted standards and see if the result maps to other accepted results. In this case, all three statisitical analyses (track size distribution, creature size/elevation distribution, and the ENM finding map as matches to accepted norms, which is powerful evidence that all three items represent datasets stemming from an actual population of living creatures, not a random collection of hoaxes and hallucinations, as the Skeptics would have you believe.

Here's the layperson version

Human mumbo jumbo DNA that is so unusual, yet so many samples that are alike, gathered under squatchy circumstances, that it's a statistical slam dunk they must be from a new species ;)

And I am accused of being "anti-science"? :o

DNA science sends people to the death chamber, and presumptively establishes paternity all the time...

But if BF is the subject, now it's "mumbo jumbo"... :rolleyes:

This is a very interesting article regarding outreach by the scientific community, "outreach" meaning reaching out to the public to explain their research findings:

http://bigfootforums...oid-the-public/

Note that women scientists, especially women with children, tend to reach out to explain their findings to the public more than men. Note also that people within the scientific community that do outreach are looked down upon within the scientific community, the "Sagan Effect".

Which is yet another reason to not take the Scientific Community's protestations of "objectivity" at face value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That should read "I suspect the answer lies in my opinion that the evidence...etc" Because that's what that statement above is: you opinion.

Yes, but my opinion on this topic also lines up with the fact that this paper will lead to nothing conclusive. I'd like to be wrong, I've been into BF as long as I can remember. And I'm not really a skeptic, except for 'evidence' like this paper. You can try and spin me with grammer lessons all you want, but the truth is, you have no more insight into whether BF will spill out of the pages of this report than anyone else, I have opinion, you have wishful thinking...but at the end of the day, it is page 174 and post 5204...and still no report, just a FB page with outlandish claims. But heh, if I turn out to be wrong, I'll be more than happy to admit it, but I don't think I will be.

Cheers

Edited by summitwalker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BFSleuth

174 pages of speculation, conjecture, and "inside scoops" that mean nothing in terms of the research and paper itself...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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