Jump to content

The Ketchum Report


Guest

Recommended Posts

BFF Patron

Does he mean our "Jodie"? she left the BFF and now "has seen the light" at the JREF from what I understand... so it I wouldn't put much weight on those rumors.

I suppose so, in what contexts, I wouldn't know. It was no secret from open forum posts that she had a direct pipeline to Justin. Many members engaged Justin in behind the scenes PM's besides her too and that could be gleaned from the thread as well.

I thought it strange with all of Lindsay's experience that he would make a "who are they" comment re: TEXLA (and our friend Southernyahoo). Any hoe-handle that's been on this forum reading (even before they were banned) would know the connection or have the journalistic skills to find out if they gave a dime about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a nice (although of course simplified) quote from a recent article by the California Academy of Sciences about new species: "While it takes months and even years to formally describe and publish a new species in a peer-reviewed scientific journal (the reason they are not included in the 2011 total)" (entire article found here: http://www.calacadem...new_species.php ). Science takes time. This sort of controversial sciences takes even more time.

What is controversial about describing a new species? It should follow the same path that describing any species uses. Don't assign any holy requirements to describing a new species of primate. If there was evidence which allowed cataloging of the species it would be just like any other animal. There isn't this evidence of course, despite Mulder's claims of hair samples, and footprints, and stories. One can always hope that this will change, but I predict it will not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BFSleuth

Drew, I'm curious how you might account for trackways that go for miles. Are you thinking that trackways spontaneously appear by magic, that they are all hoaxed even in the most remote regions, or that bears will walk on two feet without straddling just to mess with us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lindsay doesn't know my name, and I don't mind that at all. LOL

What is controversial about describing a new species?

I think an educated guess would be that some species are very closely related and the controversy occurs between the lumpers and the splitters.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Particle Noun

What is controversial about describing a new species? It should follow the same path that describing any species uses. Don't assign any holy requirements to describing a new species of primate. If there was evidence which allowed cataloging of the species it would be just like any other animal. There isn't this evidence of course, despite Mulder's claims of hair samples, and footprints, and stories. One can always hope that this will change, but I predict it will not.

Really? This isn't a subspecies of Norwegian wood gnat, it's Bigfoot. The paper will be read with more skepticism and incredulity than most. I don't think I'm stretching too much here....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is controversial about describing a new species? It should follow the same path that describing any species uses. Don't assign any holy requirements to describing a new species of primate. If there was evidence which allowed cataloging of the species it would be just like any other animal. There isn't this evidence of course, despite Mulder's claims of hair samples, and footprints, and stories. One can always hope that this will change, but I predict it will not.

The samples, tracks, etc are a matter of public record...or did I just hallucinate the book I read about them...and Dr Meldrum, Fahrenbach, et al hallucinate examining them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Particle Noun

Well, it can't be right?

I mean, there is no type specimen. So, it comes back "unknown Hominid", which can't be bigfoot, because there is no type specimen, so it comes back "unkown hominid", which can't be bigfoot, because there is no type specimen, so it comes back "unkown hominid",which can't be bigfoot, because there is no type specimen, so it comes back "unkown hominid", which can't be bigfoot, because there is no type specimen, so it comes back "unkown hominid",

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest watch1

Well, it can't be right?

I mean, there is no type specimen. So, it comes back "unknown Hominid", which can't be bigfoot, because there is no type specimen, so it comes back "unkown hominid", which can't be bigfoot, because there is no type specimen, so it comes back "unkown hominid",which can't be bigfoot, because there is no type specimen, so it comes back "unkown hominid", which can't be bigfoot, because there is no type specimen, so it comes back "unkown hominid",

See..I told you we been riding on a merry-go-round and we always end up where we started. :)

Watch1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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