Guest VioletX Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 So that's the " American Journal " again then yeah ? Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scout1959 Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 ^^^^^^ James as VioletX correctly stated the paper was returned for revisions at some point (not to remove the alien stuff, that's still in there!!). It is being reviewed as we speak in the US and Russia. Kezra, only Melba and Robin know this and possibly Igor. I can be certain with my facts here.....it won't be in this months copy of Viz And if only those 3 know how are you certain of your facts? If it has alien or angel or any other mythology included in it then it should be tossed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronnie Bass Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Am I the only one that cringes when they use this term? I realize Bigfoot isn't much better, but 'forest people?' It's a little too new age-y for me. I cringe when I see her grammar, someone should really help her because it does look unprofessional when it sounds like broken english. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) I think Igor would be better off writing in his native tongue and using Google Translate. Robin too. Anyway, I'm not sure having the paper at multiple journals in different countries is a winning strategy. Edited December 6, 2012 by slimwitless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted December 6, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted December 6, 2012 Does divide and conquer apply? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Igor Bourtsev: " I didn't suppose people, that you are so much seek of the publication in a reviewed journal. I though that more important is the result of study. And I informed the public about it in short. But as you are so seek in scientific publication, I talked only about my side, I meant the publication in Russia. Yes, the process of reviewing here is going, but not so quick as desired. Yes, I submitted the paper to a Russian journal. And the process of reviewing here started while the journal to which Dr Ketchum sent the paper, had not yet reflected the interest to publish it. But Dr. Ketchum submitted the paper to the journal on your side again. And now they admitted it for reviewing. Thus, now a kind of competition arose: which journal is ready to publish it earlier and ensures her, that one will publish it. And another one will be asked to stop the process. I explained such a state with publication in FB before, a couple of days ago. I thought that you know. But I see, some reporters wish to dramatize the state, and just a little correcting my words, pass some disinformation to make people exited." - https://www.facebook...s/3932802918998 Glad he cleared that up. It's with two journals? Why do I get the feeling that Igor keeps digging that hole deeper and deeper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Bipedalist, that's nothing a certain poster here hasn't been saying for the last half-dozen or more pages... Rather than the last 2 years right ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NevadaGal Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 I can tell already there are going to be people with PTSD as a result of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted December 6, 2012 BFF Patron Share Posted December 6, 2012 Bipedalist, that's nothing a certain poster here hasn't been saying for the last half-dozen or more pages... Not the point, it's a new blog I haven't seen linked to on the forum since it's been posted up in October. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NevadaGal Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) Ok sorry - the quote I'm responding to appears above this post instead of in it. Obvious signs of PTSD .. Please. After reading for 3 days; I already have it! I know nothing about Dna; peer reviews; press releases pro/con but I do wonder about one thing. IF one of these tests comes back proving Bigfoots exist - what will happen to them? If we prove they exist their welfare is in our hands; their future up to us. We are ill-prepared for the positive fallout. Edited post in attempt to make double post make sense. Have only confused myself and others. Edited December 6, 2012 by NevadaGal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) The only thing we DO know is this is now quite a mess. I guess I am to presume that Igor submitted Ketchum's paper to a Russian journal WHILE it was still at an American journal, the Russian Journal accepted it, but Ketchum wants to publish in the American Journal so Igor spilled the beans to force the Issue, and now the ball is in the American Journal's court? I guess that makes sense but who knows! It's difficult to understand what problems the journal is having, though we don't know the history of submission and if this is even the original journal. If it is, they've had it forever and I think they should have hammered out the details by now. Either the data isn't as locked down as is claimed, or her conclusions are too far reaching or unsupported. Either situation seems to signal rejection. If it were only fine points they had to iron out, they could be dealt with within a very short time Like a WEEK or less. They do have the Sykes report breathing down their neck and this is a paper on BIGFOOT!, for chrissakes, the biggest discovery in a Century. The journal wants to drag out the process to comb over some tiny niggling details? I would think not. I think it means there are still major problems, and may likely always be major problems with it. Perhaps the journal wants to publish both K's and Sykes study concurrently? Maybe she's objecting and the leak is a way to force the AJ's hand... I said ages ago (as a total outsider, of course) that the NDA signers might eventually give up and leak results (though I think overall they are quite loyal to Dr K), and we certainly took a big step forward towards that today. The new 'Publication Date' of 'maybe January' seems like a bit of a Hail Mary Pass to me. Once again, speaking as a total outsider. We've heard a number of dates since this whole saga began, and none have panned out. I don't think I am being cynical if I presume the January date will not be met either. It could all be as they say, but it looks more and more like a train wreck. I wonder who has been giving her advice. It looks like a lot of bad choices were made, but again I am speaking from the position of an outsider trying to read the Tea Leaves. Forest People, Angel DNA, Nephilim, Bigfoot sightings, knocked out by BF, Blueberry bagles, Bigfoot Steaks. The missteps keep growing and though we have no idea if ANY of them are true or reflect ANYTHING about Dr K's thoughts, the cumulative effect has been very damaging to her public credibility. At least within the BF field. Outside, they don't care much, but they'll find all this stuff as soon as they start looking and she'll have to answer to it. I agree that her publicist is inept. 'Forest People' they may eventually become known as, but at this early stage it is a term that is likely to get laughed off the stage. BTW if you are going to respond to these outbreak as a PR person, I think the LAST place I would do so is on a semi-private Facebook Page. I don't have any idea why they made that choice. If you are a MEDIA person it seems like you should speak to the MEDIA. Instead it's dashed off to a little in group, and then one of them is given permission to spread the word. That hardly seems like what a PR person would do, but what do I know!? Even with a family emergency. She should have known to hold her tongue until the could focus on the problem at hand. First Impressions count. Now it's just dragging on. Lastly, I have followed the comments of those who claim to be 'in the know' with great interest, as it seems at least some of them were in the know. I wonder if it is time for those people to reflect on whether what they BELIEVE they know about what is going on is actually true. I don't mean in the sense that they are unwitting dupes in a scam, but they have placed their trust in people and it's possible those people have misspoken perhaps with the best of intentions. Respectfully, as I do have a certain amount of self conscious blind faith in those in the know, I think it is time for you all to put up or shut up. I don't think you should be running interference for Dr K etc anymore, especially if you were never asked to. I think it is up to her to clarify things. If you can't tell us WHAT you know or WHO told you or HOW you know, you should zip your lips. Let the study stand or fall without your help.You only muddy the waters anymore. And if you don't like the way things are going, turn and put pressure on Ketchum to stand and deliver. Strong words, I'm sorry to say, but I think it has simply come to that point. GK Edited December 7, 2012 by gerrykleier to remove "WTF" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 I do wonder about one thing. IF one of these tests comes back proving Bigfoots exist - what will happen to them? not much, we aren't very good at catching them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 6, 2012 Share Posted December 6, 2012 Nice post, GK. +1! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 I love how Robin Lynne ForestPerson wrote: "" The only thing that happened with the paper was at one time it was sent back rejected pending revisions. They didnt even read it all. this is a long paper 50 pages" So she's saying they asked for revisions but never read it. Uh yeah ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 You get what you pay for on oh so many levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts