The Ketchum Report

[Wheellug]

:lol: What? Did you say something about lycans? Edited January 3, 2012 by Wheellug

[Guest]

I really don't know how you can say that given the extremely limited information that's been presented to the public so far. I wish you wouldn't present guesses based on your personal sensibilities as fact. You are a smart guy- why engage in speculation? More focus on facts would help us all out.

Tim B.

PS- I highlighted your personal opinions so you can see what I mean. Every statement is conjecture presented as fact.

It seems the Skeptics are speculating more than the believers on this thread.

[bipedalist]

Pretty gutsy to come out and admit that before she has the paper accepted but it is a personal decision and I've got to respect her for that.

[Guest mitchw]

David Paulides today linked to a paper in Nature, titled, "The complete mitochondrial DNA genome of an unknown hominin from southern Siberia." (April 2010) Notice that 'unknown hominin' is used in a published paper, which Paulides is drawing attention to.

Here's the link to Paulides' NABS site; http://www.nabigfootsearch.com/home.html

[bipedalist]

Thanks for that, here is the link to the .pdf download from Nature directly.

[Guest Strick]

I I agree. Very bold of her to state so explicitly that she's had sightings. I wonder where she had them? Anyone want to hazard a guess or have a heads up on this?

If I was doing PR for Melba I would have cautioned against this though. For a scientist engaged in a tricky stage of the peer review process, this could be interpreted as a one way ticket to kooksville...

[Guest Jodie]

Oh well, a lot of us have had sightings. I doubt I would have said anything until after the paper came out. Actually, if I were her, I wouldn't post on facebook about any of this at all.

[Guest Yeti1974]

Does it really matter? Is any establishment journal going to publish DNA research that attempts to support the existence of Bigfoot?

THAT will be the headline, not that she's had a sighting herself.

[Guest HucksterFoot]

Notice that 'unknown hominin' is used in a published paper, which Paulides is drawing attention to.

Here's the link to Paulides' NABS site; http://www.nabigfootsearch.com/home.html

Why? Is Paulides trying to suggest it's Bigfoot?

[gigantor]

I doubt I would have said anything until after the paper came out. Actually, if I were her, I wouldn't post on facebook about any of this at all.

It's probably part of the "exit strategy" if the paper is not published... just laying the groundwork for plan B.

[Guest mitchw]

HucksterFoot wrote, "Why? Is Paulides trying to suggest it's Bigfoot?" I don't believe so. I think he may be only showing that Nature has published an article that describes an unknown hominem which is consistent with what it is reasonable to think Ketchum is trying to do. I also wonder why Paulides knows about this April 2010 article; 'Officer, how did you come to be knowledgeable about this article in Nature journal?'

Edited January 3, 2012 by mitchw

[Guest Jodie]

I don't get that. A simple " I was wrong" wouldn't suffice?

[Guest]

She seems very confident that it is going to be published. That's probably why she is being assertive in her statements towards skeptics as to what is going to transpire when it's published.

[Guest]

Thanks for the link Mitchw. Interesting to note that the article was published 8 weeks after Nature received the original 'letter'.

[Guest Jodie]

If you are into this kind of thing he probably has a subscription.