AaronD Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 Incompetence? You have my agreement on that point. But in the matter of Ketchum, twouldn't surprise me if it was interferenced by a government agenda of some sort....not to disagree with the loose lips/leaks that may eventually follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 ^ I'm not a fan of conspiracies and cover-ups, personally. The government is renowned for loose lips, leaks and incompetence....not the other way around. There's a difference between hiding something people believe to be and hiding something people do not believe to be. "Whoa! What's up with the tarp-covered hairy giant squatchy thing, Mr. Ranger, Dude?" "Don't worry, son. Some jerks were trying to scare folks with fake bigfoot. We're getting rid of it." "Wow, it truly reeks!" "Yeah, the idiots stuffed it with pig entrails." "Man, they were jerks, weren't they? That ain't cool. I mean, I'm like totally a Vegan." "That's good to hear, son. Enjoy the park." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 Righto folks..........periodically I have to drag this thread back to topic. This is one of those occasions. Discussing where sasquatch "cannot" live is not anything whatsoever to do with the Ketchum report, which is the topic under discussion in this thread. Please return to the subject, but do feel free to start a new thread on this interesting topic if you so wish. This is official "moderator-me" talking, and I thank you for your attention. Mike Conspiracy theories, UFOs, logging and the like have no place in the Ketchum thread. Stick to the topic please. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted June 3, 2012 Share Posted June 3, 2012 Sort of. http://www.google.com/alerts . You set it up so that the search terms you are looking for are delivered to your email address. Monitor the Web for interesting new content Google Alerts are email updates of the latest relevant Google results (web, news, etc.) based on your queries. Enter a search query you wish to monitor. You will see a preview of the type of results you'll receive. Some handy uses of Google Alerts include: monitoring a developing news story keeping current on a competitor or industry getting the latest on a celebrity or event keeping tabs on your favorite sports teams I have 3 searches configured, and they may not be perfect so I may not receive news the moment the paper is published, but I think that they're good enough... +Bigfoot +Ketchum | Only the best results | As-it-happens +Sasquatch +Ketchum | Only the best results | As-it-happens "ketchum bigfoot paper published" | Only the best results | Once a day Hope this helps. Just a suggestion, she may aviod Bigfoot or Sasquatch in the paper or news release, maybe DNA or primate along with Ketchum would cover the bases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darrell Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 From what I've "gleaned" from this thread and other places on the web, Ketchum can disclose the name of the publication the paper was submitted to and who the authors are without compromising the puplication or peer review process. Is this correct, and if so what publication was the paper submitted to and who are the other authors besides Ketchum? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted June 4, 2012 SSR Team Share Posted June 4, 2012 Judging by your question Darrell, i think you're best off " gleaning " a bit more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 From what I've "gleaned" from this thread and other places on the web, Ketchum can disclose the name of the publication the paper was submitted to and who the authors are without compromising the puplication or peer review process. Is this correct, and if so what publication was the paper submitted to and who are the other authors besides Ketchum? Your gleaner seems to be malfunctioning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darrell Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 So am I wrong or not? I would have posted some of this earlier but I was out with my girlfriend, you guys know what one of those are right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Different journals have different requirements. For example if the submission was to Nature, here is their embargo policy: http://www.nature.com/authors/policies/embargo.html Note the following: "Material submitted to Nature journals must not be discussed with the media, except in the case of accepted contributions, which can be discussed with the media no more than a week before the publication date under our embargo conditions. We reserve the right to halt the consideration or publication of a paper if this condition is broken.... ... Nature journals have refused to publish papers prematurely released to the media. Journalists who break our embargoes have been removed from the press-release circulation list, and we shall continue to use this sanction when appropriate." Once the contribution is accepted for publication then it seems they can start releasing information one week prior to publication. However, Saskeptic has noted that in his experience this may not necessarily apply, and feels that it would be normal to at least note who the other authors are and possibly to discuss some aspects of the paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelefoot Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 It's been speculated that she isn't talking due to lawlers being involved, NDA's, Embargo policies, and so on... What we KNOW for sure....she ain't tellin'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 So am I wrong or not? I would have posted some of this earlier but I was out with my girlfriend, you guys know what one of those are right? Hahahaha! That's great! Love it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 (edited) It's a relief. So there's no other brother Darrell? Still think the report is getting close because of the increase in background activity. Edited June 4, 2012 by JDL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shoot1 Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 So am I wrong or not? I would have posted some of this earlier but I was out with my girlfriend, you guys know what one of those are right? Say Hi to Patty for us, Darrell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 So am I wrong or not? I would have posted some of this earlier but I was out with my girlfriend, you guys know what one of those are right? It depends on the Journal, even under normal circumstances some journals do not want their authors to anounce to the media that they have made a contribution to said journal prior to acceptance of the paper and prior to the actual pub. date. The circumstances here, where the subject of her paper is known, and conclusions heavily speculated due to provenance of the sample sources, the one thing that keeps the paper safe from rejection based on the above policy is that the Journal is anonymous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 In all honesty, I think this thread needs locking until the report comes out. How many more times must we do this "go round"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts