The Ketchum Report

[Guest]

Ah yes, but Einstein published. We're partway through August. Reading back through this thread, the hundreds of pages of it, wasn't her report finished before the end of last year, then revisions, then a projection of January or February publishing, something like that? Was it done back then? Was it done after the revisions? Is it out for publication? Is it still being worked on and modified and revised?

If the paper ever gets published, which is really the only thing that will verify the DNA, as saying there is valid DNA is not the same as having it verified, THEN Dr. Ketchum will have earned the immunity that Einstein has. Until then, it's all baseless claims, conjecture, legend, and so on. She or anyone else can go on and on and on about how she has DNA, she has proven sasquatches real, and act like the proof is in the bag, but it's not in the bag, not even close. Until she publishes, and it is verified, she's got squat, and she's not yet Einstein. If she never publishes, then it all was a house of cards.

In other words, while DNA cannot be faked, the whole DNA story is an imaginary tale we all buy into until it is published, examined, and proven to be real DNA from real sources. It's not DNA until it's verified as such. That ha snot been done.

This, I agree with 100%. While I am hoping something comes out of this. Tontar has summed it up quite perfectly.

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

I think it would need to be published before Oxford gets its own paper published if she wants to maximize her fame

[Guest BFSleuth]

As an interesting side note to this thread, I was reading an article the other day noting that Harvard University (with its $30 billion+ endowment) is looking to cut costs. One of the ways it is cutting costs is to reduce subscriptions to journals. It was rather shocking, but some of these journal subscriptions are more than $40,000 per year! With the number of different journals required for each department, the cost ran into the millions of dollars. Journals subscriptions are also being bundled so that the journal they really want has to be purchased with a number of smaller journals. One journal editor noted that when you have all the same set up costs as a major magazine to publish one edition, but in some cases a journal only distributes 1000 copies.

Instead the university is encouraging its staff to publish in open access journals. However, professors noted that these don't have the prestige of existing journals and it would impact their ability to gain tenure or grants in the future if they don't publish in the more recognized journals. This is a Catch 22 for the professors and universities.

In the event the Ketchum Report is published I'll probably end up forking over to the journal to pay for the single article. Depending on the journal that could run from $20 to $120 if my read on the situation is correct. Either that, or I'll just wait for the editorials and other analysis.

[Guest Tontar]

Well, publishing before Oxford publishes might e a good thing, or a bad thing, depending on what she publishes, and what Oxford publishes. Ketchium claims to have everything in the bag. Oxford's paper might refute everything she has said and done, and if that happens, it would be better if she held off until after Oxford. It'd be a drag if she published a big discovery, and Oxford overturned everything she claimed, showing errors in her research. If there are holes in her research, holes in her sampling, and Oxford finds and exposes those and invalidates her work, it'd be a serious black eye.

So, not knowing what she really does have, who knows if she's as confident as she sounds. I just want to know why it's not out yet, and if it is going to come out, and if so, when. Oxford seems a lot more organized, with dates lined up all the way to publishing. I like that! That seems pro to me.

[southernyahoo]

If the paper publishes Tontar, then it will be selfevident that the work is not entirely Dr. Ketchum's and should there be any flaws, that won't fall on her shoulders alone. If the work is solid enough to publish, then Sykes will likely only find the same thing but with different samples and potentially different analytical methods. Comparing the two studies might be difficult for the Layperson.

[Guest gerrykleier]

If the paper publishes Tontar, then it will be selfevident that the work is not entirely Dr. Ketchum's and should there be any flaws, that won't fall on her shoulders alone. If the work is solid enough to publish, then Sykes will likely only find the same thing but with different samples and potentially different analytical methods. Comparing the two studies might be difficult for the Layperson.

"IF THE PAPER PUBLISHES"! Pardon me, but I thought you were pretty much of the "WHEN" it publishes opinion. My memory at least...Has something happened to change yr mind? Hope not!

GK

Edited August 8, 2012 by gerrykleier

[TimB]

Well, publishing before Oxford publishes might e a good thing, or a bad thing, depending on what she publishes, and what Oxford publishes. Ketchium claims to have everything in the bag. Oxford's paper might refute everything she has said and done, and if that happens, it would be better if she held off until after Oxford. It'd be a drag if she published a big discovery, and Oxford overturned everything she claimed, showing errors in her research. If there are holes in her research, holes in her sampling, and Oxford finds and exposes those and invalidates her work, it'd be a serious black eye.

What evidence do you have that this is a possibility? I've read a LOT of conjecture by various folks, but nothing beyond that.

Tim B.

[Guest Darrell]

Your statement implies that those that don't agree with your unsupported opinions aren't using common sense.

I didnt write that. But I am stating that common sense is'nt being exercised in the related drama of this report.

Stating opinion over and over doesn't make it any more factual.

Pot, this is Kettle, Over... Thats radio speak for the pot calling the kettle black.

The one source for your opinion on Ketchum's competency (the BBB) is a known questionable source for accuracy.

My point was that the BBB rating was ingnored and dismissed for Dr Ketchum by the proponent camp and that same amount of consideration would not be extended to those outside that camp, not that the BBB report made her seem any less competent.

If Einstein was a drunk, never paid taxes, a terrible neibhor, etc... would it change the fact that E=mc2 ?

If Einstein was a drunk, ect., would he have ultimatly found that E=mc2 or would someone else have?

My prediction is the study will not be published in a legit scientific journal and will be self published in the form of a book and an abrigded version will be available on a website, Dr Ketchum will establish a reasearch organization or partner with an organization, a DVD documentary will be produced, Dr Ketchum will be a featured as the DNA consultant on the various bigfoot reality shows and conferences, and the proponent camp will declare victory, run into the streets, and fire their AK-47s in the air (oops, thats the wrong group ) I guess in time I'll know if I was right or wrong.

Edited August 8, 2012 by Darrell

[Guest Tontar]

What evidence do you have that this is a possibility? I've read a LOT of conjecture by various folks, but nothing beyond that.

Tim B.

Huh? What evidence do I have? Uh, last I recall, the vast majority of the entries in this thread have been conjecture and opinion, with very few facts at hand. I don't need any specific facts to ponder on various possibilities. This thread, if pondering and wondering is prohibited, would quickly become a wasteland, without even crickets chirping to break the silence.

If someone wants to ponder about some potential race to get published before Oxford publishes, then that opens the discussion to all sorts of possible scenarios. The idea of racing to publish before Oxford is in itself a conjecture. What else are people to do while waiting, twiddle their thumbs? The whole bigfoot phenomenon is rife with imagination and conjecture, why try to prevent it here, when the alternative is silence?

[TimB]

I don't need any specific facts to ponder on various possibilities.

So the answer is none then. Thank you!

Tim B.

[Guest BFSleuth]

My point was that the BBB rating was ingnored and dismissed for Dr Ketchum by the proponent camp and that same amount of consideration would not be extended to those outside that camp, not that the BBB report made her seem any less competent.

The BBB rating was ignored and dismissed for good reason. If you have any evidence that BBB ratings and reports are indeed something that is worthy to look at, trustworthy, and definitive, then I would certainly be open to looking at said evidence. Do you have any?

If Einstein was a drunk, ect., would he have ultimatly found that E=mc2 or would someone else have?

Perhaps he would have. History is replete with great accomplishments done by men and women with personal shortcomings, including alcoholism. The point that was being made by zigoaplex is that the work of said person stands on its own merits, and personal foibles are largely immaterial.

[TimB]

I didnt write that. But I am stating that common sense is'nt being exercised in the related drama of this report.

Pot, this is Kettle, Over... Thats radio speak for the pot calling the kettle black.

My point was that the BBB rating was ingnored and dismissed for Dr Ketchum by the proponent camp and that same amount of consideration would not be extended to those outside that camp, not that the BBB report made her seem any less competent.

I don't ignore the BBB but use logic to dismiss the impact that their reporting has on a business's reliability. It served it's purpose at one time but now is just an extortion racket.

I use anti-stick pots. They are a more charcoal gray...

Tim B.

[Guest Tontar]

So the answer is none then. Thank you!

Tim B.

That's what I said, pure speculation, just like anything else anyone else has chatted about in the past hundred pages. Don't act like you have some victory dance to do now, you haven't outed me as a passer of bad information. If you don't like people speculating, you ought to ask the mods to close the thread until something gets published.

The point that was being made by zigoaplex is that the work of said person stands on its own merits, and personal foibles are largely immaterial.

Fair enough, but what we don't have is the particular work by said person that is really the only reason anyone here has any reason to discuss her.

[Guest BFSleuth]

^ You are absolutely right, noting that the particular work by Dr. Ketchum hasn't been published.

In absence of the published work this thread has largely been a stew of speculation, conjecture, and at times (dare I say) character assassination in advance of the report. While the thread has certainly been at times educational, entertaining, and sometimes aggravating, I'm content to wait until being able to read the actual report with great interest.

[Guest Darrell]

The BBB rating was ignored and dismissed for good reason. If you have any evidence that BBB ratings and reports are indeed something that is worthy to look at, trustworthy, and definitive, then I would certainly be open to looking at said evidence. Do you have any?

Obviously Im not getting my point across the way I intended. Sorry. What my point is per the BBB rating is not that the rating means anything in real world application (but that doesnt stop us around here does it?), but that it doesnt mean anything to the proponent camp when it comes to Dr Ketchum but would mean something to them if it were someone in the skeptic camp and the rating would be used to reflect poorly on them and any research they conducted. Or whats good for the gander isnt good for the goose. Hope that makes sense.

I have a cool little Buck tactical folding knife I'd wager to anyone that the Ketchum study doesnt get published in a bonafide peer reviewed academic journal. Any takers and what do you have to wager?

Edited August 8, 2012 by Darrell