Jump to content
Guest

The Ketchum Report

Recommended Posts

parnassus

That doesn't tell us anything about what she has. We know she has what she posted before. Whether or not she will publish it is another question.

She has never shown anything but modern human DNA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OntarioSquatch

^But that's because of the NDA. Isn't it obvious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeG
She has never shown anything but modern human DNA.

Where did she show that, Parn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BFSleuth

Parn, were you in a dream state when Dr. Ketchum "showed" all this evidence to you?

If not, then please post the references or links so the rest of us can enjoy reading whatever it is you read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Particle Noun

Parn, will you now remove Substad at least when referencing this theory of 100% modern DNA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

This is very exciting news.

Parn,

Where did Ketchum post the stuff about Modern Human DNA ? I haven't seen the results of the study. Could you please link to her report ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Incorrigible1

Earth to Parn......

Calling Parn.......

Ground Control to Major Parn.......

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Though the complexities of posting images on the forum have defeated me tonight I believe there are bona fide bigfoot postage stamps available in Canada if one wanted to carry off this postal DNA wheeze with a little artistic aplomb...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tontar

So, can someone put this into layman's terms? Is he claiming that the samples were essentially human, but with mutations that made the DNA very nearly the same as Neanderthal?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Particle Noun

There was a very informative discussion a few pages back about the difference between Mitochondrial DNA and Nuclear DNA. Substad is, I think, saying that the Mito DNA (which comes ONLY from the mother) was very similar to modern humans, but still to the very extreme of the spectrum (Mito DNA is much easier to test, and it usually stops there). Then, when Nuclear DNA was tested (which is completely different and much more difficult and expensive to test), the results were not human, or not close to human. So, the only part which seemed to be "100%" human was the mito DNA, which gave rise to the interesting supposition of hybridization, meaning we have a common female ancestor, but different paternal lineage.

Or something, I'm sure I screwed that up somehow, but I believe that is the gist of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BFSleuth

My admittedly limited understanding is that it may not be an issue of hybridization that created the BF DNA, rather it may simply be a case of close ancestry in evolutionary terms, with possible interbreeding. The point of divergence between the species is a key question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
southernyahoo

Sykes published timeline is interesting. It shows a rather fast track process. This might be simply because he has more experience and credibility in the publishing process. It will be interesting to see if he can fulfill publication by the end of this year.

From reading other articles about this study, Sykes says they are looking to indentify about 20 samples through a screening process including the provenance and physical descriptions of the samples. They are also looking for explanations as to why the sample might be from the suspected cryptic hominid.

So the samples are to be prequalified before they are tested. I wonder if samples from the Ketchum study would be of special interest since the goal is repeatability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BFSleuth

From reading other articles about this study, Sykes says they are looking to indentify about 20 samples through a screening process including the provenance and physical descriptions of the samples. They are also looking for explanations as to why the sample might be from the suspected cryptic hominid.

So the samples are to be prequalified before they are tested. I wonder if samples from the Ketchum study would be of special interest since the goal is repeatability.

I consolidated all the threads into one thread now named "The Meldrum / Sykes Report". The link for submissions is now in that thread. I would encourage anyone that submitted to Ketchum to make their submissions to Sykes. It does seem that they will only accept actual organic samples after reviewing a written submission (with pictures or video evidence if you have it) and they deem the organic sample is worth their efforts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I think the biggest problem I have with Parnassus' hoax theory is the the hoaxers would need to use precognition to know where to leave the samples where they'd be found and collected in short order. And we all know precognition does NOT exist!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...