Guest DWA Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Well it's important in this case because the screed in question "went there" and I assumed you were also "going there". If you were not, then I apologize for the misunderstanding. Apology accepted. I just get impatient with the circuses really quick. If every Instant Expert in this field - and I'm looking at you, Mainstream Media - would either read relevant literature (which, yes, Mainstream Media, includes encounter reports) or simply accept that they don't in fact know this is all a crock, we'd see less of this mudslinging, because then the mainstream wouldn't take its unconscionable attitude toward this, and sasquatch researchers would quietly go about sasquatch research, and not be so all-fired Hot To Be Vindicated all the time. MK's letting us all know, before the paper comes out, that she Is In The Know about this animal everyone knows isn't real is gonna come back to bite her, big time. It's going to be way too easy for the skeptics to paint her as somebody who **** well needed to have her statements stand up. And so, she....and the skeptics will let everyone else fill in the blanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 (edited) Oh and before the followers of these beliefs get all upset with me ----- if you think what I said is bad, just WAIT until the media gets their hands on this.. And they will. They will make my little paragraph seem like a glowing review. So, I would get all my ducks in a row now - and tell Melba to get hers all straightened out too. Cause this information is widely available - and any media outlet would LOVE to read this kind of stuff about a scientist trying to publish a peer reviewed article. Like I said - Rock on !!! I'm sure it will be greatly amusing to the general public to discover there are factions within the bigfoot community that think of the other factions as completely nuts. Edited November 27, 2012 by slimwitless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Orygun, I agree. I bet there will be lots and lots of cash available to study them. If I remember correctly even Saskeptic once said that he could legitimately apply for grant money because of his Academic background as well his long time interest in the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I'm sure it will be greatly amusing to the general public to discover there are factions within the bigfoot community that think of the others factions as completely nuts. You know, I never thought about it like that - but your right.. LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 You know, I never thought about it like that - but your right.. LOL. Hey maybe the factions can bond over that ; } Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 So let's say Dr. Ketchum really has blown it and missed the boat on her opportunity because of all the leaks. She ends up publishing in Russia and thus is not taken seriously. A bit later Dr. Syke's paper comes out, he has handled it perfectly, all his ducks in a row, and comes to the exact same conclusion, publishing in "Nature". Do we retroactively give Dr. Ketchum the credit she deserves? I'm not that well-versed on disgraced scientists who were right all along... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 So let's say Dr. Ketchum really has blown it and missed the boat on her opportunity because of all the leaks. She ends up publishing in Russia and thus is not taken seriously. A bit later Dr. Syke's paper comes out, he has handled it perfectly, all his ducks in a row, and comes to the exact same conclusion, publishing in "Nature". Do we retroactively give Dr. Ketchum the credit she deserves? I'm not that well-versed on disgraced scientists who were right all along... Well, wouldn't now be a good time to admonish Dr. Sykes that if that happens, he can drag MK into the limelight a little bit. How much would it hurt either of them to point to the other one (provided the science is according to Hoyle) and say: look, same result? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 (edited) So let's say Dr. Ketchum really has blown it and missed the boat on her opportunity because of all the leaks. She ends up publishing in Russia and thus is not taken seriously. A bit later Dr. Syke's paper comes out, he has handled it perfectly, all his ducks in a row, and comes to the exact same conclusion, publishing in "Nature". Do we retroactively give Dr. Ketchum the credit she deserves? I'm not that well-versed on disgraced scientists who were right all along... ... Galileo comes to mind... Edited November 27, 2012 by BFSleuth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 (edited) just WAIT until the media gets their hands on this.. It's already happening now. http://www.msnbc.msn...e/#.ULUKmrU-ORk Any proof? It's a fascinating theory. So where's the evidence? Well, there is none. Not yet, anyway: Ketchum's research has not appeared in any peer-reviewed scientific journal, and there's no indication when that might happen. If the data are good and the science is sound, any reputable science journal would jump at the chance to be the first to publish this groundbreaking information. Until then, Ketchum has refused to let anyone else see her evidence. Edited November 27, 2012 by rockiessquatching Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 (edited) I just get impatient with the circuses really quick. If every Instant Expert in this field - and I'm looking at you, Mainstream Media - would either read relevant literature (which, yes, Mainstream Media, includes encounter reports) or simply accept that they don't in fact know this is all a crock, we'd see less of this mudslinging, because then the mainstream wouldn't take its unconscionable attitude toward this, and sasquatch researchers would quietly go about sasquatch research, and not be so all-fired Hot To Be Vindicated all the time. MK's letting us all know, before the paper comes out, that she Is In The Know about this animal everyone knows isn't real is gonna come back to bite her, big time. It's going to be way too easy for the skeptics to paint her as somebody who **** well needed to have her statements stand up. And so, she....and the skeptics will let everyone else fill in the blanks. You make valid points. Edited November 27, 2012 by Mulder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Well, wouldn't now be a good time to admonish Dr. Sykes that if that happens, he can drag MK into the limelight a little bit. How much would it hurt either of them to point to the other one (provided the science is according to Hoyle) and say: look, same result? Yes, I would think that matching results would ALWAYS help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VioletX Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Has anyone been trying to connect with media? I have written, politely, to the author of the the more sensationalist article as well as to Benjamin Radford pointing them towards this one: http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/yhr/tuesday/557851-8/sasquatch-does-dna-say-its-human Also I mentioned getting in touch with Ketchum directly, as if they could not figure that one out before they wrote the article....haha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 It's already happening now. http://www.msnbc.msn...e/#.ULUKmrU-ORk Any proof? It's a fascinating theory. So where's the evidence? Well, there is none. Not yet, anyway: Ketchum's research has not appeared in any peer-reviewed scientific journal, and there's no indication when that might happen. If the data are good and the science is sound, any reputable science journal would jump at the chance to be the first to publish this groundbreaking information. Until then, Ketchum has refused to let anyone else see her evidence. You gotta love how Occam's razor goes out the window whenever it's turned back on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dopelyrics Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I really have no idea - but are there no reputable science journals/web-sites etc' in Russia? Would it be such a disaster if the paper was published over there? Does Russia not have any credibility in the scientific world, or is it a wider issue? Really, I have no clue. Best. Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 So let's say Dr. Ketchum really has blown it and missed the boat on her opportunity because of all the leaks. She ends up publishing in Russia and thus is not taken seriously. A bit later Dr. Syke's paper comes out, he has handled it perfectly, all his ducks in a row, and comes to the exact same conclusion, publishing in "Nature". Do we retroactively give Dr. Ketchum the credit she deserves? I'm not that well-versed on disgraced scientists who were right all along... Better question: if Ketchum does the "crash and burn" will Sykes even publish? In the event of a high-profile failure by Ketchum, the blowback would attach itself to other studies. He might be well served to let things settle for 6-12 months, even at the risk of being decried for not pushing ahead to publication. Sykes has one advantage in this case: he is keeping his head down and mouth pretty well shut, and hasn't made continuous "soon" statements in public fora. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts