Guest Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Maybe I missed it, but isn't today the day where someone says, "it's Thursday again..." Weeks have turned into months, again. Well, IMHO, we do not have that much longer... According to the timeline laid out by Paulides, that weeks, months thingy.... That is an indication that THE date ... Is a Thursday ( Sally said a Thursday ) not far in the future... Not the 10th ( next Thursday) but maybe the 17th, if not the 17th then the 24th..... My quess, speculation... Opinion is the 17th.. Of course that is reading the tea leaves ..... The tea leaves have been very good lately.... If read with an open mind .... The next time Ketchum is scheduled (rescheduled) on the Hildy show ... Things might be about to explode. The revealing upcoming schedule of Paulides might also be included in the "tea leaves" Of course ...... I'm just saying..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 The tea leaves have been smoldering ash for a while now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jack Wild Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 ^^^ Just the nature of this subject, it really is an eye opener. With the HB particle it was big in different circles, but soon as you mention BF, everybody's head picks up. or put another way.... "...it's all psychological. You yell HIGGS BOSON, everybody says, "Huh? What?" You yell BIGFOOT, we've got a panic on our hands on the Fourth of July" (OR THE FOURTH OF JANUARY) I'm sorry, I just couldn't let the opportunity go by. When I was a kid the only thing that rivaled BF in the 1970's was my love affair with Jaws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Long Live The Seventies! :offtopic: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 I've noticed Ketchum has gone quiet now since Bart and Tyler released their DNA results. I'm speculating a revision is in the works for the game plan since Ketchum realized this information was going to go public. Expect many more more months or a publishing on a Russian web sight. I think the real interesting part's going to be when other labs want to test her samples to confirm results. Yes, I foresee some fun times coming! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 This site offers some insight that may be relative.. http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 This site offers some insight that may be relative.. http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/ Wow. That site provides an incredible service. It's an eye-opener to see so many - especially those citing plagiarism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theagenes Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Noooo, it's not a good point, because it has been rehashed many times, and the labs (the ones Bart and I used, I can't speak for Melba's) addressed this concern with their methods It is a good point because you need to consider all the possible sources of contamination, particularly one which might introduce foreign DNA into the interior of the sample. I don't think it necessarily negates your findings at all, particularly the single hair, but it absolutely needs to be considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Cervelo Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Wow. That site provides an incredible service. It's an eye-opener to see so many - especially those citing plagiarism. It really is quite amazing when you start reading the reason's for the retractions....talk about motives and putting ones career on the line! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 To recap: It would appear that to date all we have is Ketchum making some fantastic claims, with no evidence and no data to back it up. Is this an accurate statement? No. No evidence or data presented as yet. The veracity of her claims is still undetermined. Mulder, on 03 January 2013 - 08:43 PM, said: I said last month that this week would be the earliest I was expecting any paper to come out, and that assumes that nothing else has happened to slow things up. She just sent the revisions in recently. Nothing says they couldn't ask for more revisions. Yes but the "weeks" not "months" was her prediction. If that prediction doesn't come true wouldn't you think an explanation is in order ? Sure, but it only need be as simple as "not back yet." She has ZERO control over how long the reviewers keep the paper, and such a game-changing discovery is going to get (rightly or wrongly) triple-checked on its triple-checking. What I'm most interested in seeing are the reviews if/when the paper finally comes out, and I mean ALL the reviews. If, as many suspect, this paper may have been ping-ponged around I want to know what Journals passed on it and exactly why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Stinky Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Interesting that the Orig-6/ Q-Team (if legitimate) had indicated that they were involved in going the genetic path but have changed gears because of methodology issues due to primers. Wonder who (consulting lab) did their work and how it compares to Melbas methodology ? Sorry if you guys covered this before but I have been a little sick... Stinky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Smith posted on MABRC that their people believed her primers had serious issues. That is all I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Figures Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Interesting that the Orig-6/ Q-Team (if legitimate) had indicated that they were involved in going the genetic path but have changed gears because of methodology issues due to primers. Wonder who (consulting lab) did their work and how it compares to Melbas methodology ? Sorry if you guys covered this before but I have been a little sick... Stinky they are not a fan of dr. k as posted on mabrc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest knappster007 Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 (edited) For those of you wondering about the speed of academic publication, or a date certain, don't hold your breath. As a professor who has published in peer reviewed academic publications, the process is agonizingly slow. The author has absolutely no control over the speed of review or any knowledge of who is reviewing the results (as it should be). The reviewers do not know the author(s) either (hence, blind). Some journals take six months or more for reviews. If there are revisions requested, it goes back through the process again. Academia is a very slow world. Bottom line: if her work is in peer review, she will not know where it stands or when it will be published until it is accepted by the journal. Once accepted, a publication date is set and then public relations and press releases may begin. Edited January 4, 2013 by knappster007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts