Guest Cervelo Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) Ahhh yes the Bigfoot buddy syndrome nothing unique to Russia plenty of that right here! V, More so the DNA=Bigfoot basket Edited December 6, 2012 by Cervelo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 So that's settled then? Speculation over? The paper has not been rejected. It is pear review. It was returned for revision. That's all folks. For the moment FP is just fine. Leave the Latin until later. Yawn. What's next? That's peer review by the way, not the Man from Delmonte giving his 2 cents worth. Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) Heck no this could easily drag on.....forever! Edited December 6, 2012 by Cervelo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockape Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) That's what happens when.... **Duplicate Image** Let the cryin begin But the eggs are not all in the Ketchum basket, there is still Sykes and BartloJay's tests. Edited December 6, 2012 by See-Te-Cah NC Removal of previously-posted image Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 I speculate (why not ?).. the report will make one last stand in the good ole USA, in Branson (not Bronson).. where all the "getting tired" acts make a final go of it, before they become history. It will eventually be published in "Russia", after further "review". My source.. I funny idea I got from here, and the Simpsons (ode to Branson). Just as good of a source, as what I've seen in 362 pages of thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Robin @ Sas Preservation has gone on to state We feel confident that this whole situation will be resolved very soon. Possibly the end of the month. Due to holidays it might not be until the first week in January. With all the problems this is causing if it isnt done by then , we will consider other options. HOWEVER THE PAPER ISNT REJECTED ONLY WAS ASKED FOR REVISIONS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Has anybody ever given any of their 'BF' samples to Disotell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 The data is invisible. Beautiful, amazing, and groundbreaking but invisible nonetheless. More visible (given that we have sample submitters on this very forum who have gotten their results) than your Phantom Evidence of bad faith or sinister motive on the part of Ketchum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Until 'David' Paulides hits a BF with a slingshot, and whips out his sword, I can do without the fanatical attempts to fit BF into biblical characters. That's when things start getting touchy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Hey Mulder. How about this for a reason to doubt credibility? Feel free to tear this guy apart. Might want to read up on his CV first. Disotell spells it all out right here: http://doubtfulnews....foot-dna-claim/ He makes the same sort of spurious claims and invokes the same sort of logical fallacies as every other psuedo-skeptic does on the topic. His CV means exactly squat as to the correctness of his opinion. Here's what I posted over there: Responding to Disotell's "points" in order"1. Ketchum is an experienced DNA sequqncer and tester, as is her lab. It is after all her profession. 2. Sounds like "sour grapes" on being left out to me...DNA is DNA, and requiring the reviewers to be limited to "primate evolution" experts smacks of turf-guarding. 3. So a completely undiscovered tribe of N Americans with a nationwide distribution is possible, but BF is not??? Seriously??? Additionally, such a tribe would not explain the non-human nuDNA. 4) Floresiensis was completely unknown until just a few years ago. Classic Sagan Fallacy fail from a professor who should know better. Let us keep in mind that Disotell is a Dismissalist on the topic of BF based on his previous public comments. His implication of sinister financial motives on the part of Ketchum (why else note that she runs a "for profit" DNA lab), his dismissive attitudes towards anyone outside his preferred circle of potential reviewers and paper writers ("real experts", etc), and his invocation of logical fallacies as in point 4 are typical of the psuedo-skeptic/Dismissalist/Denialist community. By the way, the pages currently says "Breaking - the paper has been rejected"...anyone got any info on this rumor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Particle Noun Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Mulder, read back through the last few pages. It was a rumor from, again, Mr. Burstev, which has been debunked by Robin Lynne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 That would be very convenient for you wouldn't it. About as convenient as all your "I'm not going to tell YOU" evidence vis a vis Ketchum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) Agreed with Mulder. Disotell is spouting pseudo-skeptical claptrap. Edited December 6, 2012 by DWA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 It is being reviewed in the U.S. as well as Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 I updated my blog post with Dr. Ketchum's response to the rejection rumors. Dr. Ketchum's response - "The paper is still under review and the rumormongering is counterproductive. The science will speak for itself once the manuscript publishes." To elaborate on her response, the news of the rejection came from Igor Bustrev, a Russian researcher who types in broken English. I believe the Ketchum camp is claiming he meant 'revision' instead of 'rejection.' That being said, Dr. Ketchum is not off the hook. She would be better served if she released some of the footage that is allegedly high quality HD footage. I can think of no logical reason to withhold something that would only support the claims she made in her press release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts