Guest Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Because the public are mislead by poorly investigated journalism, and people that have personal vendetta's, worrying that their money train will be derailed by the results of her 5 year, per reviewed study, with 13 separate labs that had identical results. The amusing part is that everything about her personal life,how samples were obtained, early press release, witch is totally irreverent, is used as the hammer to drive the negative campaign. Not one person attacked the DNA analysis showing how she could hoax it or why it could not be correct. The conductors of this negative campaign and their behavior, is far more unprofessional than any of Dr.K's actions. Yep. Classic ad hominem. With the hope my question is taken simply so to avoid the land mines and tar pits that litter this thread, I will naively ask what does the next step look like? Since the topic and the formal press release have forced the outcome to straddle both the scientific and public arenas, the next steps are unclear to me. So what I'm asking is what happens next (mechanically) in the best and worse case scenarios? If the best case is the paper is published in a unquestionably reputable journal and there is evidence (video, pics, flesh,etc) to review and share, how is that made known to the science community and public? Hold a press conference? Basically. If the worse case is no paper and no evidence, how does the BF community recover and make positive progress for the future? Initiate a similar but new project? Basically, we wait for Sykes/Satori. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacemonkeymafia Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 While following this like so many others I have found myself getting tugged back and forth on the supposed findings. Through it all I'm trying to remain neutral. On one hand I'm finding the 15000 year hybrid thing hard to digest. On the other , why would someone invest 5 years into a sham? Talk about a reputation destroyer! I hope all labs involved did have identical results, one way or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 So besides the data, are the remaining samples shared? If so, how? To the highest bidder or for best friends only? And/or is there some sort of coordinated effort to submit more samples? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 So besides the data, are the remaining samples shared? If so, how? To the highest bidder or for best friends only? And/or is there some sort of coordinated effort to submit more samples? These are good questions, and I have NO idea who is qualified to answer it. Have any of our members EVER been directly involved in a new species identification? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 (edited) I noticed that they gave a time estimate for the hybridization event but never reported on an age derived from the Y chromosome. I suspect there is a lot more in this report, but that Melba is only reporting on what has already been leaked. The Male chromosome is passed down with limited reshuffling with the rest of the genome, so there should be a way of estimating when our species diverged from theirs. In either in the press release or an interview or both, she did say the pre-hybrid animal diverged from what are now homo sapiens longer ago the the neanderthals and denosovans did. Edited December 2, 2012 by Oak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 I wrote an email to media@dnadiagnostics.com : > Dear Mrs. (or Mr.?) Lynne, > > I am just a private person and not related to any US media, but I hope you > could answer this quick question me. > > Could you name the co-authors that have been working with Dr. Melba > Ketchum on the Bigfoot DNA paper? > > Thanks in advance; regards, > - Philipp Maier > Her response: Philipp, Thank you for your email. however at this time I cant release any more information until the paper is released. you will find however the information you are asking for in the paper. Take care, Robin Lynne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Someone on MK's FB page said they spoke with Robin Lynne to explain the DNA may not be "sexy" enough for the public and that close-range images and "Wild Kingdom" style video were required. He *says* the PR person told him there are things like that in the paper and the whole work will "blow people's minds". All hearsay I suppose but interesting nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted December 2, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted December 2, 2012 Pretty consistent with the old Nat. Geo. rumors slim, take a deep breath, I think it will take time to breathe. LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Robin Lynne's writing and spelling make me WINCE. I would be a better public spokesperson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 (edited) Well Melba did state she has 'a clear picture or two'. I'm just hoping we get to see the one with 'ole biggie wearing a cougar hat, LOL. Edited December 2, 2012 by HODS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 The whole pictures thing is a bit bothersome. If the DNA didn't come from the subjects in the pictures it means nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Igor Bourtsev: "There begun a big discussion some researchers accuse Dr Melba Ketchum in deadly sins. I want to say tthat the fault of Dr Ketchum was that SHE ONLY DID the study, NOBODY ELSE did it, though it was not banned to averybody to do that. ONLY SHE studied more than a hundred samples and sequenced more than 20 mtDNA and produced 3 full genomes!.. Everybody of the criticists COULD do that, but DIDN'T. And now she is being accused for her activities... Please, do the same, skeptics and critical researchers, it is allowed. Go ahead!" - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Whilst DNA=Critter is good enough for me (along with a digestible explanation of why the DNA results can't be flawed of course), I think Cervelo's point of needing something more 'tangible' is a good one as this to my mind is going to be what Joe Public will want. Even if we got, say, a 'hand', I don't think it's good enough. Someone will say it's a deformed this, that, or the other. Probably only a complete body will do for many. I'm hoping that we get a double or triple play from Ketchum and associates: DNA results followed by some excellent video footage and maybe one or two other unexpected goodies. I expect hope there are people working behind the scenes to choreograph this correctly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyO Posted December 2, 2012 SSR Team Share Posted December 2, 2012 Igor Bourtsev: "There begun a big discussion some researchers accuse Dr Melba Ketchum in deadly sins. Sounds like something out of the next Harry Potter movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Igor Bourtsev: "There begun a big discussion some researchers accuse Dr Melba Ketchum in deadly sins. I want to say tthat the fault of Dr Ketchum was that SHE ONLY DID the study, NOBODY ELSE did it, though it was not banned to averybody to do that. ONLY SHE studied more than a hundred samples and sequenced more than 20 mtDNA and produced 3 full genomes!.. Everybody of the criticists COULD do that, but DIDN'T. And now she is being accused for her activities... Please, do the same, skeptics and critical researchers, it is allowed. Go ahead!" - https://www.facebook...s/3911321021964 Although there is a humor note (which deadly sins? Only seven. Need to know...!) the point is made. Why does the mainstream think hairy hominoid research is going anywhere when they let barely-part-timers, largely unpaid, prove things for them...and snicker loudly before any results are even official? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts