The Ketchum Report

[Guest]

@Corvus Horribulus- But don't we have Dna for Boisei, so in that case it would not fit with the unknown factor, unless I am confused...

Where have you read this?

On a separate note: a one minute guide to DNA extraction, for those interested:

http://www.explorato...ncient_dna.html

Edited November 26, 2012 by corvus horribilus

[Guest]

I noticed an "anonymous" poster on one of the blogs is already using Ketchum's early data, copyright filings, BBB rating and other assorted rumors to discredit her.

And here I've been wondering what he's been up to since last posting in this thread. Now I know.

???

[Guest]

The interesting part (to me) is that they're not outright dismissing the whole thing.

Well, scientists cannot outright dismiss it without actually reading it. All we have really is a promise of a Report coming out that says all these things. Until the Report is actually published, it's preliminary. Though promising, if she can deliver on what she's announced. I hope she has the goods.

And as for other bigfooters (the who's who of bf-ers) dismissing or approving the findings, they can say anything they like, same as us. As none of us are geneticists, we to some degree, have to take the word of the geneticists/scientists according to our own understandings.

Off to follow your links, slimwittless. Thanks.

Edited November 26, 2012 by madison5716

[Guest]

I noticed at least one science blogger quoted at Bigfoot News (thanks slimwitless) has already misinterpreted what Ketchum was saying, though apparently sincerely interested:

Tyler A. Kokjohn, Ph.D., Professor of Microbiology atMidwestern University: "Moreover, a 15,000 year divergence point is estimated. This is quite contrary to expectations." He then goes on in length talking about how that isn't much time to have much divergence in us and Sasquatch. Ketchum clearly said this was the upper limit for a hybridization event, not a divergence.

In fairness, most of these scientists are probably coming into all of this bigfootery stuff cold. Real shock to the system, but it's got to be pretty exciting for the open minded ones.

I also made a mistake before. I was pretty sure that Ketchum found the Sasquatch nuclear genes as hominin, but thought she wasn't explicit about this. Actually she was when she said, ". . . but Sasquatch nuDNA is a novel, unknown hominin. . . "

Edited November 26, 2012 by tsiatkoVS

[Guest slimwitless]

???

Here's the link. The contention that Ketchum doesn't understand that every human sequence isn't in Genbank is the tell.

Regardless, it's clear this will be the meme if the story goes mainstream.

Edited November 26, 2012 by slimwitless

[TimB]

No kidding. The sense I get from many posts here is that a lot of folks here know just enough to get themselves in trouble.

I'm not knowledgeable about this, at all, which doesn't bother me any, because if there is only one thing I know about DNA - and I'm pretty sure I know it, and pretty sure it's the only thing I know - it's this:

You can't declare a species when the only piece of physical evidence you have is a DNA sequence derived from, well, something, we think.

If you can back up that opinion with fact or precedent, I'll be very impressed.

Tim B.

[Guest DWA]

If you can back up that opinion with fact or precedent, I'll be very impressed.

Tim B.

Actually, don't have to. you'd have to show me one instance where a species designation was confirmed without a type specimen. It doesn't happen.

[TimB]

Homo Denisova. There's one. And you still have to back up your opinion with fact for it to mean anything.

Tim B.

[Guest icicle]

Indeed

(On the subject being taken seriously by scientists).

Other scientists who looked at it took it seriously too. Its the media who are going to be a problem, or in my case Hubby. Hubby is a big problem. He laughs because I won't go out the back at night. Wish I'd married a scientist

Edited November 26, 2012 by icicle

[Sasfooty]

Can a veterinarian be a geneticist too?

Tim B.

According to Wikipedia, it seems that they can.

A geneticist is a biologist who studies genetics, the science of genes, heredity, and variation of organisms. A geneticist can be employed as a researcher or lecturer. Some geneticists perform experiments and analyze data to interpret the inheritance of skills. A geneticist is also a Consultant or Medical Doctor who has been trained in genetics as a specialization. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneticist)

27 years of research in genetics, including forensics (from the press release) should qualify her to be a geneticist.

[Guest DWA]

(On the subject being taken seriously by scientists).

Other scientists who looked at it took it seriously too. Its the media who are going to be a problem, or in my case Hubby. Hubby is a big problem. He laughs because I won't go out the back at night. Wish I'd married a scientist

Actually, given the scientific ignorance of the sasquatch evidence in general, you might not have done too much better - if at all - marrying one.

[bipedalist]

Here's the link. The contention that Ketchum doesn't understand that every human sequence isn't in Genbank is the tell.

Regardless, it's clear this will be the meme if the story goes mainstream.

http://neurodojo.blogspot.com/

Here's the better linkage to your link slim

Edited November 26, 2012 by bipedalist

[Guest slimwitless]

http://neurodojo.blogspot.com/

Here's the better linkage to your link slim

Thanks. It looks like the site admin deleted the comment I was referencing.

[Guest]

Well it's obvious from what dr meldrum posted on Facebook that he thinks ketchums new publicist is a nut bag, I hope ketchum isn't in the same frame of mind as her publicist, she may have to ditch this one as well

[Guest OntarioSquatch]

The embargoed science paper that is being released tomorrow might be the one. It has all the right keywords. I wouldn't hold my breath though...

Edited November 26, 2012 by OntarioSquatch