Guest Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Let's just say that if Ketchum's claims pan out it will open a can of worms... Try a beer vat...the big industrial size ones... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 This is what I found in her statement about this particular comment.. More distantly removed from Denisova and Neanderthal. I'm not sure how he makes the leap to saying "more distant from the great apes". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 I don't think this guy fits the bill although he does look expensive. FWIW, he registered quite a few of the bigfoot dna-related domains that surely belong to Ketchum. I checked that site - so I did not appear ignorant. There does not appear to be a Constitutional Attorney on staff - but judging from the size of the firm - it's not impossible they may know one. Very high powered firm she has it seems. It's hard telling what he is exactly doing for Melba. I see you brought up the domain registration (which is not uncommon for someone to go through an attorney) but anything else.. Who knows. Constitutional Law is very - very specialized. It's like Criminal Law - most lawyers know about it - but not all of them practice it. Does that make sense? But like I said - a firm of this size could have one - and may not have that area of law listed. Junior partners sometimes specialize in things that are not listed on law websites also. I agree with you that Ketchum should prove these things exist before lobbying for their rights. If they do exist, a sane discussion can proceed without mockery. Well - if any of this is proven - I have faith very rational conversations will be had. But, it has to be proven.. This is why I have always said - I wish this would have just remained quiet until everything was done and over.. There is no way we will now avoid the mockery, inside or outside, our field of research. It's just human nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest poignant Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Definitely jumped the gun there asking for legal protection. Deliberate or faux pas? Makes you wonder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 *shrugs* Just posting what I could find folks.. I will leave the scientific stuff up to those who know it better than I do - and that is just about anyone.. Hey I admit I am no scientist.. I will find Igors original post.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Is it just me, seeing this as more than a 'Constitutional Rights' argument? Nope. At least not in the sense I think you mean it. It's going to be more about the Constitutional rights of people to access the forests, and workers in the timber industry (what's left of it) to have jobs, etc. Human OR ape, watch the size of "wilderness" areas (where NO human activity is permitted at all) soar either to "grant them their aboriginal land rights" or to "protect their habitat" (under the Endangered Species Act). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Here is Igor's original post that got this party started.. I removed his phone number and email address... Just cause I don't want to get into trouble.. It's easily found. INTERNATIONAL CENTER of HOMINOLOGY (RUSSIA)The DNA analysis of the Bigfoot/Sasquatch/Forest People specimen conducted by Dr. Melba Ketchum the head of DNA Diagnostics, Timpson, TX, USA has been completed!!! Team of American scientists led by Dr. Melba Ketchum for five years has analyzed 109 purported samples of such creatures. The study has sequenced DNA of a novel North American hominin, commonly called Bigfoot or Sasquatch or Forest People. There were a large number of laboratories associated with this study including academic, private and government laboratories in which blind testing was utilized to avoid prejudice in testing. Great time and care was taken in the forensic laboratories to assure no contamination occurred with any of the samples utilized in this study. After 5 years of this study the scientists can finally answer the question of what Bigfoot/Sasquatch really is. It is human like us only different, a hybrid of a human with unknown species. Early field research shows that the Bigfoot/Sasquatches/Forest People are massively intelligent which has enabled them to avoid detection to a large extent. They are different than us, however human nonetheless. The hybridization event could not have occurred more than 15,000 years ago according to the mitochondrial data in some samples. Origin of this Hominin was probably Middle Eastern/Eastern Europe and Europe originally though other geographic areas are not excluded. The manuscript associated with this study has been submitted to a scientific reviewed magazine. For many years, people have refused to believe they exist. Now that we know that they are real, it is up to us to protect them from those that would hunt or try to capture them for research or for sport. They should be left alone to live as they live now. After all, they are our relatives. At this time, analysis of the Bigfoot/Sasquatch/Forest People genomes is still ongoing. Further data will be presented in the future following this original study. Additionally, analysis of various hair samples purportedly from Siberian Wildman are being tested in an effort to determine if relatedness exists between the Sasquatch and Russian Wildman. Dr. Igor Burtsev, Head of International Center of Hominology, Moscow, Russia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 (edited) An interesting legal angle or two: If they are proven to exist, whether 'Human' or not, what about the possession and trade in Bigfoot Body Parts? You can see where some might be found (Bones, teeth, hair, etc), other might be more acquired, relatively passively like Carpenter's tape gambit or more forcefully by hunting and shooting one. Also what about burials, if it's determined they occur or even a found corpse? Also, if Human or not, what about going into the woods and 'researching' Bigfoot? Would you need a permit? Would the state only allow people with degrees to do it? Would it be illegal to wood knock or howl if you're out in the sticks? Need a permit to try and film them a la Monster Quest-a permit different than what you'd need if you were simply filming flowers and trees? My take is very little should be done legally. We should resist jumping the gun and going to extremes. It will probably take YEARS for the practical limits of Human/Bigfoot interaction to play out so we need to have a good grasp of 'boots on the ground' reality of it, before we start making unenforceable laws. I think a straightforward 'No shoot' (except in self-defense-problematical as that might turnout to be) law is about as far as everyone could agree on. Possession and trade in body parts being an area where something might (and would need to be) hammered out fairly quickly too. Everything else, wait and see. Collect Data. Observe and Report, as was said in one of those MALL COP Movies! GK Edited November 29, 2012 by gerrykleier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 (edited) CNN has it right! No, they are not even close, I truly wish some people would use some common sense and at least give her a chance to let the paper publish, before assuming that she did it wrong. She was a total skeptic before she started the testing.One of the reasons why it took so long is that she went over the data multiple times and had 13 different labs test the samples and all had the SAME results. It's just pitiful how many of the big name people let there pride and ego get in the way, they rather do everything possible to discredit the study because they would have admit they are wrong and their "rock star" image they have about themselves would be buried forever. Edited November 29, 2012 by zigoapex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 (edited) gerryKleier: Also, if Human or not, what about going into the woods and 'researching' Bigfoot? Would you need a permit? Would the state only allow people with degrees to do it? Would it be illegal to wood knock or howl if you're out in the sticks? Need a permit to try and film them a la Monster Quest-a permit different than what you'd need if you were simply filming flowers and trees? That's exactly why I said - lets all be careful what we wish for. The Great White is protected - but not in all waters. Scientists must go through tons of legal red tape where these protections are - so most scientists just do their studies where these protections are not in place - just to do what they do... We will be no different - depending on the kind of "protection status" they receive. Edited November 29, 2012 by Melissa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Nope. At least not in the sense I think you mean it. It's going to be more about the Constitutional rights of people to access the forests, and workers in the timber industry (what's left of it) to have jobs, etc. Human OR ape, watch the size of "wilderness" areas (where NO human activity is permitted at all) soar either to "grant them their aboriginal land rights" or to "protect their habitat" (under the Endangered Species Act). My belief is that bigfoot is for the most part nomadic, so I really doubt that any meaningful legislation could be produced - or is needed - in terms of habitat protection. The status quo works for BF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 With these bold claims being made by Ketchum, and no data to back it up.. no peer review either.. I'm just waiting for the train crash. Can't look away. How many of you have any confidence in this being authentic bigfoot DNA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Interjecting for a bit of humor on 'manimal'...pic taken from this site: http://inventorspot..../manimals_13736 Look at the similarities . Tim B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 ^^^ Ask Justin Smeja about his confidence in the DNA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southernyahoo Posted November 29, 2012 Share Posted November 29, 2012 Definitely jumped the gun there asking for legal protection. Actually it is expected of someone who feels they have proof, so calling for government protection should rightly follow that. Calling for it isn't quite the same as demanding it right this second but it can be twisted that way. If she hadn't said it, people would ask why not, you know the drill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts