Jump to content

The Ketchum Report


Guest

Recommended Posts

Hi,

It's around 1hr 53 minutes into the interview. Smeja isn't named, and Dr Ketchum says she "wants to stay away from that " but adds "Personally, I think he's telling the truth".

Best,

Lee

Edited by dopelyrics
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes thanks Melissa I do remember this however I did not know Robin was there, how can you be sure of this? Have you seen the delegate list? Also I meant I would ask her to clarify her position not to field direct questions from forum users as such.

Re asking Meldrum directly, i am assuming she has via facebook as we are all linked there.

I gave you the links to the information. How am I sure? This article not only names her - but they quote her and say she was there. I thought you would at least read the articles.

Here ya go. I removed her last name.

I still think you might both be better served talking to Dr. Meldrum directly. Gossip is great but getting info from the actual person is far better.

The conference is attended not only by scholars and Yeti buffs. US farmer Robin Lynne lives in a house in the Michigan forest and claims that there is a Yeti family living in the neighborhood.

(last name removed by me) says Bigfoots [bigfeet?] visit her home on the daily basis… to get food. They got so accustomed to the practice, that whenever she forgets to feed them, they start hitting her porch with sticks. Even though Yetis visit (last name removed by me) house every day, there are no photographs or video footage. However, that is no riddle for Yeti enthusiasts. They say the Bigfoot has been elusive because it possesses extrasensory abilities, making it possible for him to evade sightings and generate noise in video equipment.

I only include the full section because I don't want to be accused of removing anything.

I'm pretty sure I understand her position on this topic as well. Happy to help out with whatever info you need. Just let me know.

Edited to add: Ooops I forgot the link to the specific article.. http://rt.com/news/yeti-conferense-correspondent-proof-381/

Edited by Melissa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mulder said:

Because Justin is the only human in the us with mtDNA from Eastern Europe/the Caucasus...right? *shakes head*

Reaching, Melissa...really reaching...

Mulder, go back and read the information given by Tyler. It clearly states Justin submitted his own DNA sample - to the lab that did the work for Tyler. That Lab confirmed - this is Justins DNA. That is not reaching or even speculation. THAT is fact. Please go back and read it for yourself instead of trying to insult me.

In fact - this information is on the very first page of the report that is linked by Tyler - here is the link. https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B2_Ab-LKXZlNNFRTQjRmUXItWGc/edit?pli=1

Edited by Melissa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get fact and fiction all mixed up in this....oh wait, nevermind, it would be inflammatory to correct myself.

Did I read somwhere that Justin was never asked to provide a sample of his own DNA for Dr. Ketchum, was it Justin that said that or am I mixing up the story?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CTfoot - I am not speaking for Tyler, Bart or Justin - but I do believe they said Melba never asked Justin for a sample - and he never submitted one. If that is wrong, Tyler, Bart or Justin - please feel free to correct me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gave you the links to the information. How am I sure? This article not only names her - but they quote her and say she was there. I thought you would at least read the articles.

Here ya go. I removed her last name.

I still think you might both be better served talking to Dr. Meldrum directly. Gossip is great but getting info from the actual person is far better.

I only include the full section because I don't want to be accused of removing anything.

I'm pretty sure I understand her position on this topic as well. Happy to help out with whatever info you need. Just let me know.

Edited to add: Ooops I forgot the link to the specific article.. http://rt.com/news/yeti-conferense-correspondent-proof-381/

As already stated Robin and Jeff are able to contact each other re facebook. No i did not read the links as i knew of the conference and your post simply reminded me of it. Was trying to put the kids to bed without disruption at the same time as posting quick responses not an easy feat.

Wouldike to remind you again (emphasis) that my original post was made to genuinely ask for opinion NOT to gossip, which are a entitled to whether one agrees with it or not. I am also in contact with Jeff Meldrum but my point to post was to glean feedback from others.

You are pushing a moot point. Save it for the tar pit.

Note worthy - history shows us that science does not infact work like that. Galileo to name but one.

Edited by kezra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You asked me to basically back up my statements - with links, and I did.

I wish you all the best - and I am happy to help you out with Information :) Take care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest slimwitless

^"One of her samples" that NO ONE can demonstrate she has EVER said that tested positive for her "unknown". Lots of claims that she said it, but not one person has linked to any proof that she did. As you point out, she steers clear of the issue in interviews.

I'm not sure it's wise for Ketchum to accept Smeja's story without proof. Unlike Bart or Tyler, she hasn't talked to the guy enough to establish any opinion on his character (unless you count the angry phone call Justin says he got after one of his interviews). But you're right, there's no public proof she's ever said the sierra sample is BF. That leaves you free to conclude whatever you like.

One of these interviewers should just straight-up ask her the question. It's strange they don't.

Edited by slimwitless
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest slimwitless

"But you're right, there's no public proof she's ever said the sierra sample is BF."

Too bad.

That doesn't mean I wouldn't bet serious cash the current iteration of the paper claims Smeja's sample is BF.

If betting were legal, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:popcorn:

Is it just YOU and ME, or is this all more than patently stupid, that a scientist conducting a DNA study can't and won't talk about it, but allows releases to be made, appears on radio, TV and online interviews, but she can't talk about it, then when asked about something we're all lead to believe was a part of the study, can't talk about it... but everyone associated with this is under a NDA.... and then she still goes out and does interviews, but she can't talk about anything, 'coz the peer review isn't out and she doesn't want to jepardize the study, then goes out and does more interviews about the study that she can't talk about. <?>

HUH?

Edited by GuyInIndiana
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure it's wise for Ketchum to accept Smeja's story without proof. Unlike Bart or Tyler, she hasn't talked to the guy enough to establish any opinion on his character (unless you count the angry phone call Justin says he got after one of his interviews). But you're right, there's no public proof she's ever said the sierra sample is BF. That leaves you free to conclude whatever you like.

One of these interviewers should just straight-up ask her the question. It's strange they don't.

George did indirectly in the recent C2C interview. She wouldn't comment beyond saying she "believed" the story. Let people make of that what they will...

The ultimate point is that the third-party "bear" finding for Smeja's sample is being used improperly by Skeptics to again attempt to whole-cloth dismiss the Ketchum study. They base that on a claim that Ketchum found that particular sample to be positive for her "unknown". That claim has not been backed with any publicly document-able citation by Ketchum. IF (I emphasize the "if") such linkage can be established, a second look will have to be taken at the issue.

As for Smeja's story itself, it is no worse off than it was before. It was not backed by physical evidence before the lab report, and it still isn't backed by physical evidence after the finding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...