Guest Nalajr Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I agree with Squating squatch. I read that link 2 times and when it was originally posted and there is not a single word in there from MK that says anything about it being submitted to a "journal," being in peer review or some kind of publishing schedule. NOTHING. There is someone that looks to be answering a question for her about it being "out of her hands," but MK doesn't do anything to explain what that means. If that series of posts is what you are hanging your hat on that this "paper" or "study" is about to break loose, I don't think you have a very strong case. I could easily take those words and say that SHE says she doesn't care if it takes a month, a week or a year, or words similar to that and then of course there is the all too familiar "I am NOT going to try my science in the media," whatever that means. In fact she admits that the science was done LAST YEAR when she told of being able to get a ton of money from documentaries and such. How could she get a ton of money and do a documentary if her science was incomplete or not finished yet? You think Discovery Channel would spend the millions it would take to produce a documentary if she told them "now guys my study is only barely done, I still have a LOT of work to do on it and will probably take another year or 2 until it gets completed and published?" The people at Discovery would roast the tires getting out of the parking lot if they heard that. I've been asking for a LONG time just to give a name of the journal that she is working with and that is mandating all this uber-tight lipped security on everyone within the same zip code of MK and I have never received anything that even resembled an answer. Lot's of people have been asking this for a LONG time and yet no answers come. I believe the 3 scientists that have actually been published numerous times that spoke up a while back and basically said the way this thing is going is total BS. Not their words, MINE. All of them said they have never seen something like this take place in reputable scientific journals. There is NO REASON what so ever that she couldn't post on her FB page and tell what the ACTUAL status of this thing is. No one is going to make me believe that there is a journal out there that has rules that are that strict that mandate that not a single word can be uttered about your submission, at ANY point until it is published. Real scientific journals ALLOW the scientists they are working with to go to professional conferences and meetings with colleagues and present a synopsis of their study and what they are seeking to prove and give at least some details. Is there anyone out there that thinks that just maybe MK has gotten into something, with all the talk and claims at the beginning, that she can't get herself out of now and save her reputation? Just an idle contemplation. Hopefully the study from Britain will be done and released very soon and make all this back and forth a moot point. Nalajr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 ^^ I know they will hate me for this, but that is the basic truth. At this point there is no evidence that a paper has been submitted to any journal that I have seen, besides hearsay. I know a couple of people claim they have inside information, But it still comes down to hearsay. At this point in time, Melba has not confirmed that she has even submitted a paper to any journal, let alone if it's in peer-review. I hope I'm wrong, but after this amount of time I don't see any conclusion coming from this report. The other thing I wanted mention again was I found it interesting that as soon as Oxford made known that they were going to do testing on "proposed bigfoot" samples, Ketchum took done her public facebook page. Just a mild observation. May not be anything, but seems to be just as good of a speculation as the rest of the thread. So whats your thoughts about her taking down the public facebook page when Sykes announced he was going to do his own study? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 My sense is that after being wrong about the publication date Dr Ketchum decided not to make any guesses or give any information that could also be dissected in unfavorable ways just as much as keeping mum would. What I mean is that people will talk no matter what. I may be wrong but I do not think Dr K was aware of how this whole thing would end up so much like a political smear campaign and also have to deal with people sharing her closed group posts and misconstruing them. Better to say nothing is maybe her code at this point.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Darrell Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I think we will find bigfoot before Ketchum gets her story published. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Nalajr you bring up some very valid points, it is these same points that have me worried if the study and evidence that she claims to have will ever see the light of day. I think I am in a very large group of folks that have waited, given up, gone back to waiting, and now are only half way interested in anything that comes from the Ketchum camp that isn't the journal article or the results of their findings. I 100% realize that these things take time but I also feel that their has been ample time given by sooo many of us who have waited paitently for the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 I used to check the public facebook page every day and it was becoming a real circus - lot's of cranks, questions and "are we there yet?"s. I'm not surpised it was taken down. I'm sure the timing had nothing to do with the emergence of the Oxford study. It's not like Dr. Ketchum has gone AWOL anyway - she still posts and adds the odd comment on her personal FB page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nalajr Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 She has brought that spotlight upon herself. All she had to do was make a post on her FB page telling people what is really going on and where in the process things are at. She could very easily tell people how things are progressing without "trying her science in the press" which is nothing more than a self serving, meaningless excuse for not telling anyone ANYTHING about what's going on. How convenient too. Anytime someone presses for the slightest detail or update, trot out "I'm NOT trying my science in the press" and that's that. She cultivated the circus going on around her....she can just as easily end it too. Nalajr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 To some degree it seems like we are just all bitching about something we have no control over that we wish we did. I'd say my personal patience line has finally been crossed as I find myself agreeing more and more with the above 250 pages of criticisms. I see no good reason why she should be so silent unless we were a mere week or two away from 'the announcement'. Otherwise it seems that some sort of lengthy and detailed statement dealing with the situation seems in order. I don't know that she 'owes' anything to anybody here, but she has gotten widespread support from the BF community. She went public with her study at the beginning and has spoken erratically since then, usually to make things more confusing IMHO. It's just natural that we would want to know what is up... I don't really buy the defenses that have been offered for her behavior-defenses offered less frequently as time has gone by I might note. I understand that Bigfoot is not the same as a new species of spotted toad etc, but the total clampdown on info is counter-productive and borders on suspicious even to one who 'supports' her. It seems like there are a lot of basic questions that could be answered in detail without harming the forward motion of the study-if indeed there is any forward motion to the study... I don't even buy the notion that she is keeping quiet because the journal wants her to. If her paper is solid, she has ALL the leverage in this situation. What journal WOULDN'T want to publish a study proving Bigfoot exists, after all? The journal should be worried that SHE will go elsewhere, not the other way around. I say the clampdown seems 'suspicious' to me, but I am not intimating hoaxing on her part at all. I presume there is none from her and she is completely on the up-and-up. It just seems that something must be weak or out-of-control with the study to cause the Ketchum Camp to go into lockdown mode. That's just me guessing, maybe we are just a week or two away....I doubt it. My suggestion would be that MK should do an interview with someone to address the issues that have come up. That will never happen, but it COULD do a lot to alleviate the 'Ketchum Fatigue' we are all feeling. It doesn't seem abusive or demanding that we are asking her to stand up and speak out at some length. GK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted September 2, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted September 2, 2012 ....What journal WOULDN'T want to publish a study proving Bigfoot exists, after all? The journal should be worried that SHE will go elsewhere, not the other way around. Yes, this has been something that has had me bumfuzzled from the get go... if the science is there the publication should be on it like a bird dog on a quail. Hopefully it is and there are some extras in process such as a five stage publication series or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Yes, this has been something that has had me bumfuzzled from the get go... if the science is there the publication should be on it like a bird dog on a quail. Hopefully it is and there are some extras in process such as a five stage publication series or something. It seems like if they were preparing for a big bang type of unveiling then she could tell us that! GK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Suesquach Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 Recently, I've read several DNA articles regarding human ancestry, i.e. Neandertals, Denisovans and the like. Possibly these maybe the "intro" articles to Dr. Ketchum's final publication that will reveal bigfoot? Just my opinion.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 What journal WOULDN'T want to publish a study proving Bigfoot exists, after all? The journal should be worried that SHE will go elsewhere, not the other way around. I think the problem is simply that if the research is found to be flawed after the fact, then any journal of repute risks losing its credibility for giving credence to the seemingly 'crackpot' idea that relic hominid/hominins exist. There have been so many hoaxes before, that everybody is VERY wary of any 'irrefutable' evidence presented. Recently, I've read several DNA articles regarding human ancestry, i.e. Neandertals, Denisovans and the like. Possibly these maybe the "intro" articles to Dr. Ketchum's final publication that will reveal bigfoot? Just my opinion.... Yep, this is why I raised one of them on this very thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chelefoot Posted September 2, 2012 Share Posted September 2, 2012 ^^ I know they will hate me for this, but that is the basic truth. At this point there is no evidence that a paper has been submitted to any journal that I have seen, besides hearsay. I know a couple of people claim they have inside information, But it still comes down to hearsay. At this point in time, Melba has not confirmed that she has even submitted a paper to any journal, let alone if it's in peer-review. I hope I'm wrong, but after this amount of time I don't see any conclusion coming from this report. The other thing I wanted mention again was I found it interesting that as soon as Oxford made known that they were going to do testing on "proposed bigfoot" samples, Ketchum took done her public facebook page. Just a mild observation. May not be anything, but seems to be just as good of a speculation as the rest of the thread. So whats your thoughts about her taking down the public facebook page when Sykes announced he was going to do his own study? I'm pretty sure the Facebook page was taken down way before the announcement of the Oxford study. I followed it daily and in reading it in context it was plain to me that she has submitted to a journal which she has not named and it is in some stage of peer review. I don't see how that is not very clear if you read it daily as I did. But that, of course is just my opinion, fwiw. But I do wish it would hurry and get published. I'm tired of waiting, too. But I don't think that just because it doesn't happen on my time, it's not going to happen at all. But I wait anyway, because I do think something is coming from the study and I want to be tuned it to hear all about it! To some degree it seems like we are just all bitching about something we have no control over that we wish we did. I'd say my personal patience line has finally been crossed as I find myself agreeing more and more with the above 250 pages of criticisms. I see no good reason why she should be so silent unless we were a mere week or two away from 'the announcement'. Otherwise it seems that some sort of lengthy and detailed statement dealing with the situation seems in order. I don't know that she 'owes' anything to anybody here, but she has gotten widespread support from the BF community. She went public with her study at the beginning and has spoken erratically since then, usually to make things more confusing IMHO. It's just natural that we would want to know what is up... I don't really buy the defenses that have been offered for her behavior-defenses offered less frequently as time has gone by I might note. I understand that Bigfoot is not the same as a new species of spotted toad etc, but the total clampdown on info is counter-productive and borders on suspicious even to one who 'supports' her. It seems like there are a lot of basic questions that could be answered in detail without harming the forward motion of the study-if indeed there is any forward motion to the study... I don't even buy the notion that she is keeping quiet because the journal wants her to. If her paper is solid, she has ALL the leverage in this situation. What journal WOULDN'T want to publish a study proving Bigfoot exists, after all? The journal should be worried that SHE will go elsewhere, not the other way around. I say the clampdown seems 'suspicious' to me, but I am not intimating hoaxing on her part at all. I presume there is none from her and she is completely on the up-and-up. It just seems that something must be weak or out-of-control with the study to cause the Ketchum Camp to go into lockdown mode. That's just me guessing, maybe we are just a week or two away....I doubt it. My suggestion would be that MK should do an interview with someone to address the issues that have come up. That will never happen, but it COULD do a lot to alleviate the 'Ketchum Fatigue' we are all feeling. It doesn't seem abusive or demanding that we are asking her to stand up and speak out at some length. GK Plus 1 I agree. I have been a supporter of Dr. K all along. However, I am now suffering from the Ketchum Fatigue you talk about. I almost feel that many supporters feel somewhat betrayed at times. No, she owes us nothing. But, we have supported her through all this, so why wouldn't she want to give us some kind of reason to continue. And the occasional "soons" are, well...you know. I hope it is going to be everything it has been hyped up to be. I really don't care at this point which paper comes out first. That's the fatigue talking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 (edited) I will believe that she is going to publish when it happens. She may prove me wrong but we'll see. I don't think she was fully prepared for the amount of attention that would be given. You or I may think she would be prepared but I don't think she was. I hope she proves all of us wrong and publishes a groundbreaking paper that stuns the world. Time will tell. Edited September 3, 2012 by SquatchingOne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 Pardon my ignorance on the subject, but could someone please recap the process she has to go through to get published in a journal? I'm gathering that "peer review" is an integral part of the process but I'm not really clear how that works or how the peers are determined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts