Jump to content

The Ketchum Report


Guest

Recommended Posts

JREF is already playing the "russian journal = junk science" card.

And DWA, you're simply wrong. Finding human blood on a knife would prove to the authorities that a human was cut by the knife, even if they didn't know what human it was.

Actually, that's wrong. Where the DNA is and whether the knife is bloody would also figure into it.

All I'm saying is: watch the mainstream reaction. If they can't be convinced the sample came from a bigfoot, it'll be so-what.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three complete nuclear genomes from different sources ought to squelch that IMO.

I am not saying this is MY thinking (that the study is in error - but I haven't read it yet), but, I think others will disagree. If that sample tested does not have a reliable chain of custody that will be the same sample used in all three of those genomes. If that original sample is contaminated, it is contaminated, for all three genomes.

ETA.. just saw "different sources" I agree... sorry. I'm thinking if the same sample is used, like from the S. Kills steak.

Edited by BigGinger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, that's wrong. Where the DNA is and whether the knife is bloody would also figure into it.

All I'm saying is: watch the mainstream reaction. If they can't be convinced the sample came from a bigfoot, it'll be so-what.

Did I not say the sample was from a bloody knife? (Yes I did)

How about you take up the challenge: where would undocumented hominid/primate DNA that matched nothing else on record come from other than an undocumented hominid/primate not currently on record?

I have yet to see anything on FOX tv or internet...or any other news source for that matter.

http://www.kxxv.com/story/20175587/bigfoot-dna-sequenced-in-upcoming-genetics-study (ABC affiliate)

only one I can find so far...

Also just read someone over at JREF proclaiming he didn't care "how many DNA studies they did, BF does not exist..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not unless it is documented that a woman had an extramarital affair with a "novel non-human." Check the keywords.

We don't know anyone was married.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The press release said " Our data indicate that the North American Sasquatch is a hybrid species, the result of males of an unknown hominin species crossing with female Homo sapiens.", so I thought that it might fit. I could be wrong though.

Edit: ok, I understand... I understood the "extramartial" as an interracial side leap.

Edited by Obsi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did I not say the sample was from a bloody knife? (Yes I did)

How about you take up the challenge: where would undocumented hominid/primate DNA that matched nothing else on record come from other than an undocumented hominid/primate not currently on record?

http://www.kxxv.com/...-genetics-study (ABC affiliate)

only one I can find so far...

Also just read someone over at JREF proclaiming he didn't care "how many DNA studies they did, BF does not exist..."

Well, JREF wouldn't accept the sasquatch if one were moderating their boards.

As to the challenge: if I don't know what the DNA came from, I can simply go, prove to me the sample wasn't contaminated, or a mistake made in the analysis. Biology insists on type specimens for a reason. The only reason I even want science looking for the sasquatch is that I'd like to see one - preferably, many, or at least photos and videos of same - before I die. (They seem to be doing fine without our attention; more than I can say for the species that have gotten that attention.) Anything that moves the mainstream - and its time and money - away from the question is, to me, not good. And this just isn't being handled well, something that can only increase the raised eyebrows.

(And yep, OK, you did say "blood" and not "DNA." Whoops. Sorry.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, JREF wouldn't accept the sasquatch if one were moderating their boards.

LOL...true

As to the challenge: if I don't know what the DNA came from, I can simply go, prove to me the sample wasn't contaminated, or a mistake made in the analysis.

That's where 3 complete DNA sequences and multiple independent labs come in.

(And yep, OK, you did say "blood" and not "DNA." Whoops. Sorry.)

No worries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest slimwitless

So, besides the igor connection, where are people seeing that is will be a Russian journal publishing?

I'm guessing they're making it up. I believe there were some similarly confused people on JREF. Maybe that's the original source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...