bipedalist Posted October 21, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted October 21, 2012 i think that there is a widespread misunderstanding of what peer review actually accomplishes. Nature, possible the world's most respected scientific journal often publishes articles discussing the good, the bad , and the ugly of peer review. i'll list a few articles below. i ask only that you frame your view of what this alleged article by ms. ketchum will truly represent by taking to heart the following: ...... Yep, methodology and the ability to draw conclusions and interpret results appropriately from the collected data is paramount. Any overreaching, overgeneralization, lack of technical sophistication, lack of alternative interpretations concerning specific elements of the results and their interpretations can lead to logic "fuzzier" than our omnipresent blobsquatches on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Hello All! Long-time reader, first-time poster – have been following this thread for over one year now and just had to jump in there on two points I have some personal experience with… @ slappy – “the most important thing that the reader must realize about a peer reviewed work is that the review DOES NOT validate the author's results, it only attempts to validate that the proper scientific rigor was followed in determining them. it does not uncover bad data, dishonest representations of data, or outright lies, it can only attempt to verify that the author went about determining the findings in the proper manner.†While your comments are certainly true in many cases it is not true of all peer-review processes. I can present an example of where peer-review did go farther than simply looking at Scientific method. Recently at my university Drs. Gallant and Goofus calibrated on a paper that Dr. Gallant was to submit to a large journal. While in peer-review parts of this paper were found to have work entirely lifted from other sources and this made the journal very, very displeased with Dr. Gallant and the journal took steps to ban Dr. Gallant from any future submissions as well as take other steps of action for the gross plagiarism. Dr. Gallant couldn’t understand what was going on until it was shown that the contributed content from Dr. Goofus was lifted entirely from other sources. Totally dumbfounded Dr. Gallant confronted Dr. Goofus and all that was offered in response was “It isn’t like that.†Now, both Drs. Gallant and Goofus are well published, and knowing human nature this most likely wasn’t the first time Dr. Goofus lifted the work of others, so yes, it would have been passed through at other journals, but certainly not this one. Amazing what one can get away with when tenured. But, just to say, nothing in life is an absolute. The other thing I would like to add to the discussion is regarding red hair… I was born a ginger and have lost count of the times in life I have been approached by people asking why I would dye my hair “green.†This would mostly happen while in direct sunlight and as they would approach they would be confused because they could see my hair was not green after all, but auburn. For the longest time I thought such people were just rude until one day I saw my reflection and the way the sun hit my hair it did indeed look GREEN. It blended in nicely with the surrounding foliage. Auburn hair has a tendency to turn grey early as well, I say grey but it is really more clear with silver highlights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Luckyfoot Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Uh oh. Melba's not having an easy go of it is she ? Doesn't bode well for her project imho. http://www.bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2012/10/breaking-melba-ketchums-dna-diagnostics.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest crabshack Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) Uh oh. Melba's not having an easy go of it is she ? Doesn't bode well for her project imho. http://www.bigfootev...iagnostics.html I read this part "This adds more to the undeniable disgust that has been generated by the constant secrecy and delays from a study which should have been handled like the current Sykes study" and maybe its all monkey business. Edited October 21, 2012 by crabshack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted October 21, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) Bigfoot evidence commenters page links lead to some very bad juju, I will say that. Edited October 21, 2012 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisco Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Well, this could mean that she's out for the count and her "wishy washiness" is not just limited to Bigfoot DNA studies. Then again, it could also mean that she's "moving on up" to bigger and better digs as a result of, her soon to be released, ground breaking Bigfoot DNA study. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Soon ? Then again, it could also mean that she's "moving on up" to bigger and better digs as a result of, her soon to be released, ground breaking Bigfoot DNA study. Umm yeah ahhh no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cisco Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 I looked at her franchise standing in the Texas State registry and both businesses, registered under her name, including DNA Diagnostics, are NOT in good standing. This mean that, at a minimum, she has not paid her franchise taxes but it can also mean she's delinquent in her property and/ or or sales taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 It could be for safety reasons. She was already very worried about showing up at Bigfoot conferences. And apparently the labs reputation sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 It's all going down hill. People are bailing on this thing left and right. I think you submitters might want to start questioning Ketchum about what's going on with your results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 I wonder how the guys under NDA are feeling? I expect they will be getting regular reassurances from MK, but recent events must be of some concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 I'm not feeling concerned at all. I know result of the tests on my sample, & that's all I ever wanted anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 ^ I know I might be chancing my arm here, Sasfooty, but are you able to reveal whether you were just given the raw results of the tests, or if you were given some interpretation of them also? Just curious. Not asking for the results themselves, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 I was told during a phone conversation, in plain English, what her findings were. I was pleased with the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Good to hear. I hope the NDA at least allows you to share your knowledge with the other submitters under NDA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts