Cotter Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 PB - I believe that was addressed earlier in the thread - and one of the members that had an NDA reviewed it and saw no expiration date. However, there was some conjecture as to the types of NDA's signed as it pertained to submitters vs. scientists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thermalman Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 AMEN KB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I wonder if the 'Angel DNA' has 52 chromosomes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 A lot of Ketchums past comments are coming back to bite her. The media has already gotten hold of her past promises that the paper would be released "soon." In addition, some of her associates, such as her new spokesperson, are coming off like "kooks." Her credibility is taking a beating because of these people. Anybody with a computer and a WiFi connection can Google these names and the results are not very flattering. I don't know which one is worse, the Russian scientist or the spokesperson. She really should have picked somebody else to handle her publicity. To add insult to injury, the "Angel DNA" has already made it into the media. I really hope she's being published by a reputable journal and can back up her statements with her study. Otherwise, the damage done to the credibility of this subject will make the Georgia hoax look like it never even happened. Hold on to your hats as the ride is about to get rough. Some of her worst quotes "Angel DNA' and 'Dogman' come to mind right away could have very pedestrian explanations. Perhaps confronted by sequences that were puzzling or hard to work with she, or someone else made a wisecrack about these sequences being 'Angel DNA' and the comment was taken seriously by someone else and passed on. Perhaps some of the 'Dogman' DNA shows some differences and once again someone was present for off-the-cuff speculation. As well, both stories (and others) may well have been deliberate plants to ferret out the mole who was purportedly giving Lindsay inside information. That's a bit conspiratorial, but that's a good way to nail down a leaker. Also, if true, the leaks don't necessarily have to have been planted by Ketchum. Erikson, Paulides etc etc all have skin in the game and might be motivated to out leakers within their own groups, as well as hers. Whatever became of Sally Ramey BTW? TGK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I wonder if the 'Angel DNA' has 52 chromosomes? Which makes it closer to siamang than either gibbon or human. Hey, we knew the findings would be surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 The only thing to watch out for is the possibility that there is more than one species of North American bipedal primate. A careful read of encounter reports raises just that possibility, besides which, first, there is more than one of just about every kind of mammal in North America and, second, everywhere else on earth that there is one wild hominoid, there is another. You aren't the first to posit that. Coleman, for example, lists at least 3 that I know of: the "skunk ape" (SE N America), the "Nape" ("North American Ape", east coast), and the sasquatch/bigfoot (all over). You could even postulate 2 types of 'squatch, the more gorilla/ape like, and the more human appearing. But I guarantee as soon as you do the Skeptics will go thermo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Ah, my bad, didnt remember nda expiration discussion. few minutes until the mystery embargoed study releases however lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 You aren't the first to posit that. Coleman, for example, lists at least 3 that I know of: the "skunk ape" (SE N America), the "Nape" ("North American Ape", east coast), and the sasquatch/bigfoot (all over). You could even postulate 2 types of 'squatch, the more gorilla/ape like, and the more human appearing. But I guarantee as soon as you do the Skeptics will go thermo. My life has a purpose after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted November 27, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted November 27, 2012 Some of her worst quotes "Angel DNA' and 'Dogman' come to mind right away could have very pedestrian explanations. Perhaps confronted by sequences that were puzzling or hard to work with she, or someone else made a wisecrack about these sequences being 'Angel DNA' and the comment was taken seriously by someone else and passed on. Perhaps some of the 'Dogman' DNA shows some differences and once again someone was present for off-the-cuff speculation. Whatever became of Sally Ramey BTW? TGK Well unless I heard wrong on Blogtalk's BF Tonight with MK Davis and Scott Carpenter. Once this paper is out they begin work on the cryptid part of the equation (allusion was to dogman or something strange is the message I got). I thought just when you think things are weird..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 She made Yahoo! http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/scientist-claims-sequenced-bigfoot-dna-190947582.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 ALL. Please be sure of your "facts" especially about others prior to posting anyhtning regarding those people. If it is conjecture and gossip, that is one thing. But I am very close to this entire thing and know personally most all of the people that have been mentioned. KB Are you under and NDA? If not, spill the beans! Just hopin'.... GK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 (edited) @ Scott G: And the trolls promptly came out to play when she did... The writer couldn't even be bothered to get the facts straight. It was a hatchet piece, and not a very good one. Edited November 27, 2012 by Mulder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 PB - I believe that was addressed earlier in the thread - and one of the members that had an NDA reviewed it and saw no expiration date. However, there was some conjecture as to the types of NDA's signed as it pertained to submitters vs. scientists. I find it difficult to believe someone would be successfully sued and forced to pay damages over a Bigfoot NDA! Not a lawyer, however.... I think most of the people who are holding back are doing so out of loyalty to Ketchum and a belief in what she is doing. They view themselves as part of the team and don't want to make things harder for her. Simple, Good motivations. GK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Some of her worst quotes "Angel DNA' and 'Dogman' come to mind right away could have very pedestrian explanations. Perhaps confronted by sequences that were puzzling or hard to work with she, or someone else made a wisecrack about these sequences being 'Angel DNA' and the comment was taken seriously by someone else and passed on. Perhaps some of the 'Dogman' DNA shows some differences and once again someone was present for off-the-cuff speculation. As well, both stories (and others) may well have been deliberate plants to ferret out the mole who was purportedly giving Lindsay inside information. That's a bit conspiratorial, but that's a good way to nail down a leaker. Also, if true, the leaks don't necessarily have to have been planted by Ketchum. Erikson, Paulides etc etc all have skin in the game and might be motivated to out leakers within their own groups, as well as hers. Whatever became of Sally Ramey BTW? TGK Well remember a year back or so Paulides made a comment on one of his blog post about BF DNA or its function, that has never been seen before. It was eventually changed after a bit of a firestorm erupted over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 She made Yahoo! http://news.yahoo.co...-190947582.html Too bad they can't get their facts straight. Ketchum has clearly stated the paper is in review which makes the following statement false (at least where I come from): "But more important, Ketchum has not allowed scientific peer review of her findings." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts