Guest OntarioSquatch Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 She was fired? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spader Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I'm guessing you weren't part of the, "Just Say No" program years ago. M.K. reads this sipping on a drink in Monte Carlo earning Twenty Percent. Just kidding...HA! We all should just take a chill pill and wait for something tangible and stop wasting energy and time on rumors and conjecture. Lets insult and make fun of one another on another topic. Just an Idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) Boo skeptics...Let's throw critical thinking completely out the window so we can all live in a fairy tale land. Yay! Only by your weird definition of critical thinking (ie, Skeptics are always right, proponents are always not right)... And yet people like sciencecritic and mulder would rather just sinlgle out the "scoftics" instead of acknowledging the vast amount of believers who have no or little faith in ketchum. What I said applies equally across the board to anyone who keeps repeating the same tired BS non-objections over and over again. As for the debate over whether or not her publicist was "fired", it certainly wasn't my impression. She very much came off as someone who was simply uncomfortable with the situation and withdrew herself from it. Edited October 31, 2012 by Mulder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 With all due respect, BS, your inside information appears to be somewhat faulty. As does yours. And *new* camps emerge. I'm not in this to argue so I'll be leaving this at this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) I'm not in this to argue so I'll be leaving this at this. Good idea. It's always wise to not repeat faulty information. Edited October 31, 2012 by Sasfooty 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spader Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Most folks , on this forum, look forward, to the next RL post (rumor) on Ketchum.... On a side note ........ You must admit she is being pretty slick....... She cut off all information for skeps to snipe on, The NDAs are not being challenged. You have hundreds of submitted samples, a dozen or so PHDs.. And Yet, no break.. That must mean, SHE IS ON TO SOMETHING" or some one would break the NDA.. But never fear, in the meantime, we are not waiting for RL posts, for that " RL type" of (rumor) entertainment .......... Each day the naysayers, skeptics, bored desk sitters, skoptics, cynics, negative posters, academics types, Ivory Tower Types, speculators, patience depleted types, and others ..... post a rumor similar to what RL would post...... Based on nothing, but "rumor material........ Please notice the number of posts, on this forum, " Posted with No Facts" only speculation. Speculators, that don't know JACK about what they are investing in ... often go broke... Most investments, for profit, are made of more facts than speculation.. Of course, that is one of the reasons the Bigfoot scientific community is currently BROKE when it comes to proving Bigfoot... They don't know jack, they just post speculation.... BTW, JACK is not behind a desk when it comes to proving Bigfoot..... When you "invest in something, and go broke ...... You might just feel foolish. Then again you might just keep posting as an uninformed SKEPTIC... (Speculation) ..... Go specs and skeps ........ I can wait on the next RL rumor ..... Your Binders are full of speculation and are only rumor ..... Say it ain't so specs, prove it ain't so skeps, ... I dare you. They ( skeps and specs) must think the ferocity and number of posts "against" Ketchum have her quaking in her boots ( please note the fact she is expanding her role in genetics opening a new office), and may by sheer numbers, stop the study. Keep up the good work folks ... M.K. reads this as she sits on a beach earning twenty percent. Just kidding HA! We are wasting too much energy throwing insults at each other over rumors and conjecture. Lets wait for something tangible and then waste the energy slamming each other. Burry the hatchets and put this thread to rest until something REAL happens. I enjoy reading Mulder parry just as much as the next fellow, I think somebody, somewhere is having fun at our expense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Good idea. It's always wise to not repeat faulty information. Touche and right backatcha. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Everything I listed is fact, not speculation. Not rumors from RL. Nah, just your twisted interpretations of them. Super secret studies and evidence,, If it was secret, you wouldn't know about it. nda's galore, Nothing wrong with NDA's discrepancies with samples, More like differences between opinion and science. public Facebook page going dark, A true measure of science? website down, disconnected phone, closed business, no foreward address, Moving, and taking a new direction in research suspicious journal embargo, embargo's are normal, even Sykes acknowledges. changing interpretation of dna Thats a step towards conclusive in my book. firing her PR spokesperson, I know you are sad about it, but it was volunteer work, so I'm sure she kept her day job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) And yet people like sciencecritic and mulder would rather just sinlgle out the "scoftics" instead of acknowledging the vast amount of believers who have no or little faith in ketchum. Whoa, lets get the rules straight ...... Skeptics can bash Dr Ketchum who is on record for attempting to do something, about proving Bigfoot does or does not exist, but ole ScienceCritic can not be skeptical (there's that word skeptic again) of the constant do nothing "Efforts" of the lame stream scientific community.... Beg your pardon, but that fits the description of Skepticism. Whose rule is it that says I cannot choose the subject to be skeptical of ...... Get real. The lame stream scientific community, ( yes that is COMMUNITY) has a much longer record ( century upon century) of do nothing, and not accomplishing any progress, to the point of behaving like the so called scientists of the dark ages. Y'all remember that don't you? The leaders of the so called Scientific Community of the dark ages, considered research to be sitting in a room arguing about how many teeth a donkey had...... If some one like Meldrum (and others) went outside to count the teeth in a donkey's mouth ....... They disqualified him.. Or removed his TENURE. Sound familiar.... ? They set back modern science hundreds of years with this enlightened approach. A skeptic is a skeptic, and MOST Skeptics choose the battleground they want to enter..... That lack of faith, rumored to be rampant in this thread, will change when the report releases. If not then carry on..... Edited October 31, 2012 by ScienceCritic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) All that aside, without science you wouldn't have a computer to type on or a forum to express your opinions. I could go on but the list of benefits to you from science would fill 300 more pages of this thread. Edited October 31, 2012 by CTfoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I think SC is talking about the members of the science community, not science itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 But the ideas and thoughts originate with the members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 (edited) M.K. reads this as she sits on a beach earning twenty percent. Just kidding HA! We are wasting too much energy throwing insults at each other over rumors and conjecture. Lets wait for something tangible and then waste the energy slamming each other. Burry the hatchets and put this thread to rest until something REAL happens. I enjoy reading Mulder parry just as much as the next fellow, I think somebody, somewhere is having fun at our expense. My old college science professor, often stated, the value of the group brainstorm when solving complex problems. In the full function of a successful brainstorm attack on a complex problem, every one is involved ,...and ...participates .. By offering statements approaching the problem from every direction each member of the group could bring it from.... Then you weed out the bad, statements....... See where you are at, then weed it some more.... Some where in there the answer could lie.... But that is with everyone on the same page trying to solve the complex problem ....... This forum is not joined as one, as some want to build up and others tear down.... So spader, it ain't going to get any better, just hang in there...... The weeding out will process have to be voluntary .. If we still keep all of the same old weeds, the forum will continue to flourish in an ebb and flo rhythm.... Until the release.... Edited October 31, 2012 by ScienceCritic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I have done peer-review paper in 2007 during Masters Degree Information Systems. Depending upon the subject and commonality or originality of the subject it could take from 6 months to several years. Also, the peer review publication (Colleges and Universities this falls under, not a professional subject) scrutinize and have the ability and a right to not publish or even review. Not saying Bigfoot exists, but, this "Bigfoot" subject flies in the face of academic dogmatic science, with this said, will come a-lot of refusal to review or publish. When I submitted my peer review, I was asked to review my subject in front of academia board as they thought my studies and data of IT and decline or personal physical social Interaction were crossing the line between Psychology and Information Technology. Or in another way of putting it, I was delving into a Professional Peer Review and Scholarly. Where I had more psychology than Information Technology. So it was not published and determined I must re-submit the work and I refused. So... I quit being Doctoral Candidate and owe a-lot more money and the option to continue. But this is veering off the subject. Peer review is asking other peers to review your findings in a "official" document for acceptance into the area of study. But, remember there may be a sticking point or a point being made of how close the DNA is to Human,""""or""" some reference of another subject area another peer group may be needed to review the findings and validate the findings. And as a result they may laugh or even discard. But that tis the best part, if the review shows or even states the existence, those not willing to accept the document or studies may be proven wrong if a "subject" is caught, captured or "hopefully" not killed and brought in for the poking and prodding they will have lost credibility. The double edged sword. The Peer review is in one way "selling" an idea or subject to fellow academia or professionals. Another sticking point of a "Scholarly" Peer Review is finding peers that are experts in the field of study <-- this is a hard one to overcome. If Dr. Ketchum is being scrutinized over finding another "expert" opinion in the paper, then... we will have a delay or refusal to publish. We are venturing into uncharted waters. I like to think of this as the Christopher Columbus obstacle, is the world flat or round... I hope I answered some questions from knowing how this works, and how peers have options to publish, request rework, or refuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Ketchum stated she severed ties with Ramey. Ramey states she was going to resign anyway. Sounds like Ramey was fired to me. http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2012/09/dr-melba-ketchum-cuts-ties-with.html This is interesting. This is from Sep. 22.The poster wonders if anybody has bothered to check if Ketchum is behind on her mortgages. now her labs for sale and she's behind on her taxes. http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2012/09/more-on-ketchum-ramey-fallout-by-member.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts