Guest DWA Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Pardon my ignorance, but what does this ['JREF types'] mean? Here's the link. http://www.randi.org/site/ I have stooped to reading it but would never post there, not on this topic at least. Anyone serious about the sasquatch knows that, at least as regards this topic, JREF is a modern Flat Earth Society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Sorry if this has been covered, but can anyone confirm that Dr. Meldrum actually said this: Especially the last part about what the spokesperson said? I've seen that quoted here somewhere but had no idea it was attributed to Dr. M. There's no doubt that he said it, but he hasn't shown any proof that she said it, as far as I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 All I can say about it, if indeed that is Meldrum's response and it looks it, is that for anyone who is trying to apply science to this topic, it's going to be a bit of a teeth-grinder to see - well in advance of any published results, and with no specimen being provided to substantiate the results - revelations that the DNA sleuth has been frolicking with the alleged animal. That's going to do something - and not positive - to the community's perception of her objectivity and rigor. Way life is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Melissa, I did not mean to imply you where hammering at anything, it was just the way the topic was going. Melba has been dealing with leaks, and constant inquiries ever since the very first leak. Character assassination, attacks on her professionalism, even her love life for goodness sake. As I stated earlier in this thread, the things she has said, actually said, not purported to have said, only hurt her case, if they are not true. Considering provenance will be part of this, some of the claims skeptics consider so devastating or wild, may turn out to be some of the most eye opening. Even her latest release was prompted by a Russian scientist sort of forcing her hand, and the skeptics immediately extrapolate that it will be a Russian publication. Lets wait and see, how her, and her team of professional, privately funded(and that is a very key point), handle all this. I just seen this. I agree with you JohnC - but the problem here is she NEVER should have started discussing any of this. Period. She created this frenzy - and I hate to say it but I think it's all about funding the project. If she had just kept quiet - and had not immersed herself within the community - there would not be all this speculation and her comments being discussed. You know as well as I do - in this field of research you never say anything you don't want everyone to know - and the problem is she is saying these things to people she thinks are friends. Of course these "friends" will discuss everything she says - because she has aligned herself with these ideas that are well - difficult to prove. I have nothing against her - but I wish she would just do the work and stay quiet. Now that this is all in the public - the real scrutiny of her, her credibility and her work will begin and it may not be good for any of us - even those closest to her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Mulder, Publishing (even online, open source) is pricey, and there's lots of scientists vying for journal space. I have yet to see a journal with page length restrictions wave the restriction because a study was especially groundbreaking. I suppose some of the information in the manuscript could be placed in a section called "Supplementary Material" which is usually only available for online viewing. Genes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 revelations that the DNA sleuth has been frolicking with the alleged animal. That's going to do something - and not positive - to the community's perception of her objectivity and rigor. Way life is. Do you have any human conception of just how colossally in bad taste that comment is? Mulder, Publishing (even online, open source) is pricey, and there's lots of scientists vying for journal space. I have yet to see a journal with page length restrictions wave the restriction because a study was especially groundbreaking. I suppose some of the information in the manuscript could be placed in a section called "Supplementary Material" which is usually only available for online viewing. Genes Fair enough...does that mean that there are topics that simple cannot be discussed because of the amount of page space it would take to discuss them fairly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Particle Noun Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I suppose that is true, that we don't know for sure, but I've never seen Dr. Meldrum make something up like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Yeah, it's shock jockeying at it's finest. Dude doesn't care about the truth, he wants hits on his website! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 DWA, on 27 November 2012 - 12:54 PM, said: revelations that the DNA sleuth has been frolicking with the alleged animal. That's going to do something - and not positive - to the community's perception of her objectivity and rigor. Way life is. Do you have any human conception of just how colossally in bad taste that comment is? It's only that way to folks whose minds are in the gutter. 'Frolicking'? Seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 (edited) I suppose that is true, that we don't know for sure, but I've never seen Dr. Meldrum make something up like that. Okay,,,, I can't be the only person on this site that knows Melba has aligned herself with the "Bigfoot talks to me" group of researchers?? If you are a member of this group - no offense and rock on!! But, one of her closest confidants is Thom Cantrall... C'mon - I can't be the only person who knows this?? LOL. Edited November 27, 2012 by Melissa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasfooty Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 (edited) I suppose that is true, that we don't know for sure, but I've never seen Dr. Meldrum make something up like that. Well, sometimes people get a little desperate & say things..... Edited November 27, 2012 by Sasfooty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icicle Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Well, hopefully he and Ketchum can come together to understand and share the wealth of information about Bigfoot that is coming. That is likely what he is thinking. I saw the interview with him and the Chicken Of Truth posted earlier. And read other stuff. He is only peripherally involved with Sykes he implies, pre screening the samples. Now he tries to get info from Ketchum, someone whose work he feels he and Sykes can validate, and it descends into a farce. I feel for the guy, somewhat. Years and year slogging away on campus, so derided by his colleagues there they got up a petition against him and there were rumblings about him losing his tenure. I should think the one thing that kept him going was the thought of the look on their faces when he gets a Nobel prize. And now he is upstaged by some girl. I don't think he is having a good day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 That is likely what he is thinking. I saw the interview with him and the Chicken Of Truth posted earlier. And read other stuff. He is only peripherally involved with Sykes he implies, pre screening the samples. Now he tries to get info from Ketchum, someone whose work he feels he and Sykes can validate, and it descends into a farce. I feel for the guy, somewhat. Years and year slogging away on campus, so derided by his colleagues there they got up a petition against him and there were rumblings about him losing his tenure. I should think the one thing that kept him going was the thought of the look on their faces when he gets a Nobel prize. And now he is upstaged by some girl. I don't think he is having a good day. Um, he hasn't been upstaged yet. And if you think he's had a tough row to hoe, you haven't seen one yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 (edited) This woman has a PhD. There are only a handful of people on here that can even comprehend what kind of commitment and intelligence that requires. Does she? I can not find where she makes that claim herself. Edited November 27, 2012 by ScottG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dopelyrics Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Okay,,,, I can't be the only person on this site that knows Melba has aligned herself with the "Bigfoot talks to me" group of researchers?? If you are a member of this group - no offense and rock on!! But, one of her closest confidants is Thom Cantrall... C'mon - I can't be the only person who knows this?? LOL. Please can you elaborate Melissa? I'm not too sure who Thom Cantrall is or what you mean. Thank you. Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts