Incorrigible1 Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 It seems the good doctor's report is as elusive as the creature it purports to document. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Are they not the same thing? I thought this was the bottom line from the beginning and Ketchum's motivation for the paper? They are very close to the same thing yes. The images and DNA are evidence, and the cogency of that evidence is proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) Proof Yahoo? She said the pics aren't even real and that the dynamics of the study have radically changed. So how do you add up fake pics, radically changed dynamics, call it evidence and then call that questionable evidence "proof". Methinks most reasonable people would correctly not call that proof. Edited July 24, 2012 by WTB1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 What pics are you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 ^ Can you provide some examples to back up your point? I am only aware of one new species identified & documented using photo and DNA and that was fairly recently. I believe the species was already Identified via the standard methods, if you are referring to the Monkey that was ID'd by photo and DNA, then that was simply a subspecies. That means the species was already on file, and the DNA was used simply to distinguish the subspecies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 What pics are you talking about? The pics of the "Sierra steak" posted on Lindsay's blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 *gahhh!!* *bangs head* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Well, I just slapped my forehead, Melissa In my defense it was 4:00AM Central Time... Well don't do that!! You could give yourself a headache.. and they suck!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) "The manuscript is NOT at the Nature Group! How many times do I have to say this? There is no pub date yet! Those pics are not real either, it looks like the hair is mounted on something fake (or tanned) and it really looks more like tanned coyote hide. The morphology is wrong for BF hair. Talk about grasping at straws. I wish people would stop bombarding me with emails every time all this fiction gets posted but that is all it is, fiction. Geez.... Ok, now that I have responded this time, this is the last post I am going to comment on the subject of this blog....and I am not going to waste my time answering any emails on it either. Just know, whatever that blog says as it pertains to ANYTHING we are doing or know, it is NOT true and I will not address this again. There are no leaks from our group and NOBODY, even the submitters, know anything at this time as the dynamics of the study have radically changed. I have way too much to do to than to answer a lot of emails. I don't want to be rude and not answer so I am posting this as an answer to all. Please do not expect anything further until the paper is released. Thanks everyone and I appreciate the support." https://www.facebook...475859872426134 Thank you for posting this Gershake. I'm trying to figure out if Dr. Ketchum posted this - or her "spokesperson". Man, she needs to work on her PR. Question I have is - does she appreciate the support or did she just spank the entire community? LOL. Wow, she is really upset. Edited to add.. OOPS !! I forgot I already posted once... Is there some way I can fix this - or does it need to be done by a moderator or admin? I am sorry Edited July 24, 2012 by Melissa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Hmmm. It sounds like she's convinced she might be the next Jane Goodall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) Interesting, her comment about the dynamics of the study. Do you think that is related to the findings in the paper or does that statement relate to the scope of publication, maybe publishing associated with other news mediums ???? Edited July 24, 2012 by VioletX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 I'm trying to figure out if Dr. Ketchum posted this - or her "spokesperson". Sorry, I should have specified. It was Dr. Ketchum herself. The Facebook page where Sally Ramey used to post on her behalf doesn't exist anymore, this is from her personal Facebook page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Smeja pretty much confirmed those pictures of the "steak" were legit when he agreed in that interview that the hide looked a little like bear. Now Ketchum is claiming those photos aren't real. What's going on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masterbarber Posted July 24, 2012 Admin Share Posted July 24, 2012 There's obviously some confusion here. Can you post the actual statement(s)? Perhaps seeing things in context will make more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darrell Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) This whole mess just strikes me as a house of cards waiting to collapse. I think the Ketchum study will become the ponzi scheme of Bigfootery. Edited July 25, 2012 by Darrell ....spelling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts