Jump to content

The Ketchum Report


Guest

Recommended Posts

Maybe the relict hominid factor would allow any legal ramifications to slip through the cracks?

This is just me thinking out loud here, but if it ISN'T modern human, would it instantly be categorized as a wild animal? Until 'science' can catch up, place it in the pecking order of evolution, and assign a different, more human label?

I will say again, with the uniqueness of this situation, he may get a free pass on it either way.

Edit - I misread your post ptang, not sure if the double 'not' was intentional, I'll let you reply to VX's question first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest VioletX

I agree, especially with the no signifigant interest by any government agency thus far, but who knows, if someone may have something to gain in the future and decide to press the issue.

I cannot fathom that Bigfoot could be categorized as a modern human, do you think so, or are you just weighing options?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Noticed that too SY, either the PR/counsel has taken over, somebody else is volunteering to do his writing for him suddenly or maybe he has a good proof reader buddy.

There's been a number of instances of posers on these blogs, so I'd be interested in what General has to say about this. It's one thing to have counsel, but he needn't have someone else write for him when all he has to do is present the facts.

In regards to Dr. Ketchums PR, the same applies. I think she is right that Lindsay doesn't know what the results are and he's simply running with any theory he can. A number of posters here have commented how he will take things said here in speculation, then claim it is valid info from an inside source. Quite pathetic in all honesty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ Melissa, why can't you A+ his post? Poignant has some pretty amazing info on a lot of relevant subjects!

But I do support the suggestion that Melba get a representative to do the PR :)

Because I ran out of +'s.. or believe me - I would have exhausted my +'s (if I could) on that post. :) After I hit the post button, I knew someone would ask me that.

Edited by Melissa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@VioletX - No, I do not think they are modern human at all, I've been rooting deeper into the relict hominid camp as info (speculation and rumors) have been made available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest gerrykleier

Oh, he'll get a ticket from F&G if they follow the CA regulations (Section 415 if I recall correctly). Basically it states that it is illegal to shoot any animal that is not listed as game. However, in this case, there may be a special exception made....

Or if he can convince them it was a threat to his safety he may be able to skirt that.

If his story is true, the F & G people will absolutely not want to deal with it. However they will have to. Unless these is some sort of wild public outcry, I suggest any action taken will be pro forma only. They will have to be seen as 'doing something' so they will, but the least that they can get away with. A citation seems about right, though I suspect they will have to have some sort of formal investigation. I see the same with 'Murder' charges. An official Investigation with no significant legal consequences. He'll probably have to appear in some sort of forum with lawyers and judges, though not a trial, I'd guess.

GK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw, off topic, Melissa: since I see you're here, how about some follow up pics to the back shot you released last spring? Supposedly several more?

I am sure you already know this - and you did indicate this - but this is not the place for that conversation. Anything else I may or may not be in possession of is between myself and this witness. I appreciate your interest - but there is already one photo that has been blown off - so I am not sure what good would come if I were to release anything else. It's a still photo.. So, I will be treating it accordingly, and will continue working with the people that have offered their help and expertise (since the release of the photo) outside this community. We are discussing pro's and con's and working through those issues - it really is very exciting and interesting to watch this type of exchange from various professionals in their fields discuss this photo, and their ever changing opinion. There is just as much disagreement as their is agreement on the various issues, but they are spelling them out for me and going through them for a resolution one way or the other - hopefully.

I have agreed to remain silent on these discussions as they are ongoing - but maybe someday we will have a final conclusion. As I have said - I really don't care which side the decision falls on, I would just like to see someone evaluate this for what it is and not involve the drama. So, it's been very interesting for me as a layperson.

Sorry, but this seems to be the wave of the future for us now. I have answered tons of questions about this photo, and those can be found in the thread on the topic. I will not be answering anymore, UNLESS it's a new question, and one I can answer. Why? Because it has served no purpose - and the same questions get asked over and over. LOL. So, I have moved on to new options and avenues.

My daddy didn't raise a fool and I know when to move on. :) So, I did. Hope that answers your question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which would get him out of a murder charge, but what about Wildlife/Forest Service?

I don't see how anyone could challenge his claim if he says he felt threatened, so I'd say he's off the hook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MikeG

We're in Sierra Kills territory here, ladies and gents. Could you try and keep things neat for us please? Each topic in their own suitable thread would be great!

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you MikeG. I figured since no moderator stepped in - it was okay to respond to. I agree however and appreciate it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's been a number of instances of posers on these blogs, so I'd be interested in what General has to say about this. It's one thing to have counsel, but he needn't have someone else write for him when all he has to do is present the facts.

In regards to Dr. Ketchums PR, the same applies. I think she is right that Lindsay doesn't know what the results are and he's simply running with any theory he can. A number of posters here have commented how he will take things said here in speculation, then claim it is valid info from an inside source. Quite pathetic in all honesty.

Due to my neophyte status, I'm not sure to what extent I can indulge in idle speculation here - but I'll test the boundaries nonetheless.

What if JS and RL have reacquainted themselves, and RL is using information/artifacts from his new best friend to get a rise/information out of MK about the study? It could explain the cleaned-up prose attributed to JS on the bfe site...

(I hope I just about kept this on topic)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest gerrykleier

Due to my neophyte status, I'm not sure to what extent I can indulge in idle speculation here - but I'll test the boundaries nonetheless.

What if JS and RL have reacquainted themselves, and RL is using information/artifacts from his new best friend to get a rise/information out of MK about the study? It could explain the cleaned-up prose attributed to JS on the bfe site...

(I hope I just about kept this on topic)

Sounds like reasonable speculation to me, not wild at all. This is a thread with 236 pages but few facts, after all!

GK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cotter, violetX- IMHO, if you don't have a DNA report what the BF are then they will show you the door. That's a fact as I have proposed differant regulations to 3 differant committees and if your study work is not conclusive the state commissioners really have no initiative to act on citizens recommendations. You have to remember this, they are the policy setters and unless you have a better hand then them well,,, let me just say they don't like citizens suggesting policy to them .... that's their job.

As for the question of relic hominid or not. If the Dna report(s) come back as close to human IMO they will have to adopt some guidelines for the saftey of

a natural resourse with state lines. If the report comes back as much less that homo sapiens, much less then a good site to investgate for your interest is nonhumanrights.org and you can get some ideas as to how "animals" are classified and any inherient rights they could be intitled to.

#1 just for the record, IMHO the samples have shown on the Mtdna side as being close to homo sapiens so animal would not be pertanient. However how close or how not so close is still to be determined IMO. Just a rough statement of how I see it so far, thats all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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