Guest Darrell Posted September 1, 2012 Share Posted September 1, 2012 (edited) So, all the professional people out there that witnessed tracks, caste them, etc... are not good enough because YOU didn't see them ? I think they know a lot more about tracks and their field skills than your giving them credit for. Why do Skeptics have to see it themselves, or it's fake or didn't happen. As long as I live, I'll never understand the logic behind that mindset. Yep thats about it. We need to see it for ourselves because it CAN be faked. Why do you proponents run blindly along with every or footprint like its the holy grail? I fought a kick boxing bout (along time ago BTW) against a fighter everybody said could'nt be beat, including several expert trainers and fighters. I knocked him out after 2 rounds. Sould I have just accepted what everybody said at face value? I also have some pretty good field skills after 24 yrs in the Army so why should I take anything you have to say on face value. As long as I live, I'll never understand the logic behind that mindset. Edited September 1, 2012 by Darrell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted September 1, 2012 Share Posted September 1, 2012 Wow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shaun Posted September 1, 2012 Share Posted September 1, 2012 Moderator statement. Can we please keep this thread on topic? It's long enough as it is without going into other subjects such as the validity of footprints, or what people should believe etc Thanks, Shaun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted September 1, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted September 1, 2012 (edited) Interesting what Paabo says the genes can tell him.The researchers also drew up a catalog of more than 100,000 genetic differences that apparently arose between modern humans and the now-extinct Denisovans and Neanderthals in the past 100,000 years or so. About 260 of the changes affect protein function, Pääbo said. "It's quite interesting to me to note that eight of them have to do with brain function and brain development — the connectivity in the brain, how synapses between nerve cells function. And some of them have to do with genes that, for example, can cause autism when these genes are mutated," he said. "I think this is perhaps in the long term, to me, the most fascinating thing about this: what it will tell us in the future about what makes us special in the world, relative to Denisovans and Neanderthals." And autism is both a communication and social disorder, meaning the coded protein differences might center back on some profound changes in speech-related genes like FoxP2 for example. Interested in the social avoidance, gaze aversion, eye contact etc. etc. not to mention intermodal perceptual differences in autism and how more new primate hominids sequenced might shed light on these genes responsible for brain cell proliferation, migration and differentiation maybe. FOXP2 disruptions also had cerebellar implications (in mice newborn ultrasonic vocals on maternal separation) in developmental disorders which might infer differences in gait, balance, linking the various senses with cognition, ability to perform refined finger movements, etc. Edited September 1, 2012 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 1, 2012 Share Posted September 1, 2012 (edited) Yep thats about it. We need to see it for ourselves because it CAN be faked. Can be =/= is. If you have proof, real tangible proof, NOT allegations but documentable evidence, then produce it. Why do you proponents run blindly along with every or footprint like its the holy grail? No one says we do. However, when noted anthropologists and primate locomotion experts describe distinct biometric indicators that are consistent across a large number of tracks found in diverse places across a considerable period of time, the reasonable and logical conclusion is that said tracks ARE in fact the authentic trace sign of an actual creature, rather than a collection of hoaxes. I fought a kick boxing bout (along time ago BTW) against a fighter everybody said could'nt be beat, including several expert trainers and fighters. I knocked him out after 2 rounds. Sould I have just accepted what everybody said at face value? I also have some pretty good field skills after 24 yrs in the Army so why should I take anything you have to say on face value. As long as I live, I'll never understand the logic behind that mindset. I'll never understand the logic behind the mindset that assumes every witness is either crazy, stupid, or not telling the truth, or that assumes every track is fake, and every expert who has testified as to the evidence for an as-yet undocumented N American primate is incompetent. Your fighting experience is irrelevant. Anyone can get lucky. To insist that the anomalous exception should be taken as the rule (In the case of BF evidence, that the possibility of fakery MUST brand all evidence as fake until proven otherwise) is a violation of basic logic. To drag this back on topic: has anyone prepared a summary of the "current conditions" of the Report? From what I can tell, it is supposedly "done", is either in final re-writing or has just finished same, and is awaiting a publication date. Is this accurate? Edited September 1, 2012 by Mulder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted September 1, 2012 Share Posted September 1, 2012 Yep thats about it. We need to see it for ourselves because it CAN be faked. Why do you proponents run blindly along with every or footprint like its the holy grail? I fought a kick boxing bout (along time ago BTW) against a fighter everybody said could'nt be beat, including several expert trainers and fighters. I knocked him out after 2 rounds. Sould I have just accepted what everybody said at face value? I also have some pretty good field skills after 24 yrs in the Army so why should I take anything you have to say on face value. As long as I live, I'll never understand the logic behind that mindset. Doesn't sound like you were skeptical about winning your bout, otherwise you might have conceded the effort beforehand. That's why everyone should be encouraged to take to the field themselves in hopes of finding their own evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 1, 2012 Share Posted September 1, 2012 An accurate update on the report is that there has not been any evidence that a paper has even been submitted to a journal yet. All we've heard is hearsay and rumors. Melba has not to this date confirmed anything. As far as we know Ketchum is still just testing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted September 1, 2012 Share Posted September 1, 2012 ^ A more accurate report might also include direct quotes from Dr. Ketchum in the matter. For example, I think if we go back in this thread we will find statements taken from her FB page(s) that noted the report is written and has had rewrites requested by the peer review process. Those statements might be termed as evidence that the paper has been submitted to a journal. I would agree that sources outside of Dr. Ketchum's statements are hearsay and rumors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 1, 2012 Share Posted September 1, 2012 I don't recall any confirmation from Melba that the paper has been submitted to any journal. I do believe she is working on a paper, But I don't think its going to be what it's been hyped up to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted September 1, 2012 Share Posted September 1, 2012 You could start by looking at this post regarding statements Dr. Ketchum has made about the process on her FB page. I don't think its going to be what it's been hyped up to be. Yeah, that's probably a good point. The hysteria from the blogosphere and forums like this seems to be giving such grand expectations it might very well be a let down to finally read the report itself. If you don't buy into the hype, then you don't have expectations. For myself I am waiting with curious anticipation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 251 pages of thread and counting... This "paper" may give the PGF a run for its money at this rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 It may seem like it's taking forever, and maybe it is, but I believe we are getting very close! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 (edited) You could start by looking at this post regarding statements Dr. Ketchum has made about the process on her FB page. Yeah, that's probably a good point. The hysteria from the blogosphere and forums like this seems to be giving such grand expectations it might very well be a let down to finally read the report itself. If you don't buy into the hype, then you don't have expectations. For myself I am waiting with curious anticipation. All I see in that link is just a passing mention about a "journal". Doesn't clarify if the paper was submitted to the journal or not. I see no reason what so ever That Ketchum can't make a positive statement that her paper has been submitted to a journal and if its in peer- review or been rejected. I'm not even talking about naming the Journal(although I think thats bull) but there has been no positive confirmation what so ever. When I first heard about this years ago I had high hopes, but after this long I really doubt it will amount to anything. When I start hearing about nda's having to be signed, That's a big red flag for me. What's up with the nda's. If the evidence is that good, It should hold up to all scientific scrutiny. Now if the nda's are about finding something new and they want to be first to cash in on it, i have no problem what so ever as long as they can supply the evidence to support there theory. But all the secrecy just puts me off. I don't feel like the people involved are being totally honest. Edited September 2, 2012 by squating squatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Mileage varies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 ^^^I suppose. The engine is putting on mileage and about to end it's useful purpose. It's getting old and using oil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts