HOLDMYBEER Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 ................... However, if this study has some good science showing that we have undocumented primate DNA in North America, and further can show that the same species shows up in different parts of the country, then it is probably good enough to publish by itself. ..................... When I speak of vetting I refer to the likelihood that 'undocumented primate DNA' has been derived from the samples held by the Ketchum study. While I have not seen all the vetting documents for all the samples, what I have seen does not convince me the samples are likely to contain 'undocumented primate DNA'. Clearly I can't speak to all the samples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 HMB - you have seen some of the vetting documents for the study? Can you discuss what you took issue with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Nobody will care if she documented it first. It's all about the release. While Sykes is basking in the glory and on the cover of Time Magazine, absolutely zero people will give a crap if Ketchum comes out of the woodwork with a paper in her hand saying, "No really, look at the date of this paper!!! I was working on it a long time!!" Even kids know you gotta get your homework done on time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 But I thought forum members might find it interesting. Reminds me of the scene in HEAT when Pacino tells Tone Loc's character.... What's wrong with you? You drag me here to waste my time like this? You saw a guy on the street...who's an ex-con ...what do you expect for that? A Junior G-Man badge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOLDMYBEER Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 HMB - you have seen some of the vetting documents for the study? Can you discuss what you took issue with? Discussing it would probably tend to identify the source and there are reasons I won't go there. Again, not wanting to over-speak, I have not seen all the documents for all the samples. What I have seen places the ball in Ketchum's court as to proving she has DNA. I am not assuming otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbhunter Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 icicle, I can tell you there is a paper and it has not been rejected. I know that for a fact, why it is not out yet has been covered in this thread. Speculation regarding the rejection from the peer review is not accurate. I cannot go into more details for legal reasons, but it is a solid written paper, many people have worked many hundreds of hours. Honestly, no one INCLUDING Dr Ketchum knows when it will be actually "released", for any type of publication. KB 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 kbhunter tells it like it is. Lots of PhD's involved and all that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest teria Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I hope you aren't using your smartphone to make that post.... LOL!! (Except for the last one! Poor guy, I hope he wasn't hurt too badly!) No I posted this from my PC. But that would probably be me if I had a smartphone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest poignant Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 icicle, I can tell you there is a paper and it has not been rejected. I know that for a fact, why it is not out yet has been covered in this thread. Speculation regarding the rejection from the peer review is not accurate. I cannot go into more details for legal reasons, but it is a solid written paper, many people have worked many hundreds of hours. Honestly, no one INCLUDING Dr Ketchum knows when it will be acutally "released", for any type of publication. KB Plus one from me. I'll take info from people who are close to the source over a tabloid-ish blog/website/rumormill any day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 If the "grooming" video was to be made available maybe things would move along, hmmmm. Anyone have an inside source on that one? I would not expect an announcement until after the election from a PR point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 icicle, I can tell you there is a paper and it has not been rejected. I know that for a fact, why it is not out yet has been covered in this thread. Speculation regarding the rejection from the peer review is not accurate. I cannot go into more details for legal reasons, but it is a solid written paper, many people have worked many hundreds of hours. Honestly, no one INCLUDING Dr Ketchum knows when it will be acutally "released", for any type of publication. KB KB, if this is true (not saying it isn't, just disclaimering), then it is a prime example of why I don't trust Science as an institution. If the paper exists and hasn't been rejected, then it should be published ASAP. There is no good reason for a find of this magnitude to be held in "limbo". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 What if they want to make it even better before it's published? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 Mulder, I think Dr. Ketchum is doing everything in her power to satisfy the journal and reviewers. I think they can come up with all sorts of hoops to make an author jump through, that can be part of it. Things might even get a bit unorthodox in how it is handled due to the magnitude this discovery would be and how difficult it can be to accept as reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 (edited) Has anyone involved read a draft of The Ketchum Paper and can say they did so? Has anyone involved talked with any of the many co-authors and can say they have done so? Just curious, as I can't recall anyone claiming to have read the submitted paper, or having talked with a co-author, or the Journal targeted and so saying. Edited October 18, 2012 by apehuman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 I do not even care about waiting on the publishing of the DNA results. Instead of DNA it is NDA that interests me. There seems to be a lot of people who know who cant say. Show me the NDA please. Is there a NDA on the NDA? Surely someone would be willing to produce one. There seems to have been so many signed there is surely a score of copies laying around. Keep your DNA. Can I see the NDA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts