The Ketchum Report

[Guest gerrykleier]

As I recall, some of the practice text on her practice protection website mentioned a possible data upload on Jan 16th. That's why we're all focusing on this week. Oh, and the RL Blog....

On my part, if it isn't published in January (or at least official announcement of publishing date with journal name etc) I will put it into the 'unlikely to be published in a major journal' mental file and pretty much forget about it. It could still end up in a Russian or online journal, but that's not worth bated breath. The 2nd option seems like it could happen any time she wished it to, so we would just be waiting for her to give up and pull the trigger.

Here's hopin....

GK

[NathanFooter]

Cornelius Melba is throwing out species protection petition statements on her FB and trying to get people to sign it.

[Oonjerah]

Cornelius Melba is throwing out species protection petition statements on her FB and trying to get people to sign it.

I hope to learn that most the people signing it are under 21.

= I'm taking a dim view of it.

[Guest]

I agree. The tipping point has just about been reached. The reaction of the world, as it unfolds, will be very interesting to observe. Will Finding Bigfoot be cancelled? It should be since Dr. K already found him.

he will spin that like a top in his favor, he'll play the position that he was right all along,he new it was only a matter of time, etc... he will not address anything negative he said about her.

[Guest]

May I ask ......? Who is "HE". That blogger RL??? Would you expect any less..

IMHO .. "Let the sunshine in ". Aquarius - 5th Generation style....

His blog is his record of truth or consequences... Let the truth fall where it may fall....

[Guest]

<p>^^^ MM finding BF

Edited January 15, 2013 by zigoapex

[Guest]

I have a question about the Ketchum report. Over the last few months, I have noticed a number of rumors about various aspects of the report. Let me stress that I am not repeating these rumors as an attempt to assert the truth of the reports. In fact, given the sources, I find them to be highly questionable at best. My query has to do with the bigfoot community's reaction to the rumors.

For instance, when certain outlets reported that one of the samples submitted to Ketchum came from a blueberry bagel, the footer community (I hope that it is acceptable to use the term "footer"; if it is considered offensive, I apologize and will cease using it future posts) reacted apoplectically, aggressively attacking the rumor and anyone who repeated it.

But that extreme reaction strongly implied that if a sample from a blueberry bagel were a part of Ketchum's study, then the credibility of the entire project would be seriously in doubt. There have not been similar attacks on other types of samples such as tissue or hair, so there is something about testing whatever residue bigfoot would leave on a bagel that even footers would agree is absurd.

However, at the same time, many (if not most) of the commentators on this board take seriously the majority of habituation anecdotes. Once again, I am not judging the believability or the veracity of habituation witnesses. I am only pointing out that if habituation stories are taken seriously, then it would be perfectly acceptable to include a sample taken from a blueberry bagel at an habituation site in the Ketchum project. In fact, shouldn't including the bagel in the study be encouraged, given that Ketchum's seemingly advanced DNA testing techniques could possibly confirm the habituation stories? With this in mind, I would think that the reaction to the blueberry bagel rumor would be, "So what? It's just as legitimate as any other sample, assuming that there was bigfoot saliva or other bodily fluid on the bagel." But maybe I am missing something.

Edited January 15, 2013 by Plenipotentiary

[Guest]

^^^ I concur. Blueberry bagel is so ordinary and familiar that when juxtaposed with a large unknown hairy hominoid it just sounds crazy and absurd to some.

For us, it's a common food item; something that we enjoy at a deli with coffee or have for breakfast to fill us up when we're rushing off to work. This indulgence has a certain stigma and connotation attached to it. It is of the ordinary.

I think there's an internal disconnect that occurs where people cannot envision the connection btw what is real and common to something that is elusive and unknown. That is when it becomes preposterous and a source for derision and humor.

[JDL]

Why not a bagel. It's got a fairly tough outer skin on which saliva is as likely to pool and dry on the outside as to soak in. Makes sense to me as something I might choose if I were looking for a food item which might both tempt a squatch to take a bite and also have a higher chance of preserving some saliva.

Fact is that the criticism has less to do with the bagel than it has to do with the critics.

Same goes for the proponents. There's precious little objectivity on either side at this point. For the most part people's assertions are now shaped by their attitudes.

[Guest]

I believe the "blueberry bagel" posts are from critical Bigfooters and used as a reference to Robin Lynn "Forestpeople" the individual now the PR for Ketchum and also the individual that was in the Russian event earlier last year Meldrum attended and reported negatively on. I think I read a post by RLFP that said she did not submit a bagel...she leaves bagels as gifts and she believes they like them. I don't doubt that actually.

It seems many feel "habituators" (in this case her home) are generally flakes b/c they do not produce evidence to match what seem to some BFers as fantastic stories. However, I was in a situation with repeated close proximity over several years and try as I might my evidence is not much better than typical (tracks, anecdotal witness, funky eyeshine vids, funky blobsquatch vids, etc) but my personal witness and experience exceeds most who attempt just tracking, etc. The division in the BF community on this issue I find fairly silly, but apparently is long running, and may be more about world view than technique or evidence? It does seem habituators tend toward "human" view of BFs and the hunter/tracker crowd a more apelike BF. The data supports for me "apehuman" in that they appear to me to have some very ape like charactristics as well as human. The DNA results are highly anticipated!

The best samples (and I don't really know, but guess) seem to be the Justin "steaks," JC Johnson's Irrigation pipe blood and tissue, Biscardi/Jenkins toenail, and then several like DK of OP have saliva (his from a game cam) and others with hair. I think the EP folks contributed hair (was that via Randy Bisson?) and so on.

To most it seems she has plenty of good samples with good provenance.

Edited January 15, 2013 by apehuman

[JDL]

I guess that's the crux of it. Given the nature of the ManBeast one is going to accept or reject assertions based on their own previous experience with squatch, or lack thereof.

[Big Stinky]

In regards to the proposed study. MK has mentioned that it is multi-faceted including various tissue/hair samples and a video as well (Erickson presumabily). How common is it to present a video in a scientific peer reviewed paper ?

I can only assume that this piece of "data" would do nothing but complicate the review process. How does the scientific peer review board validate this piece of data ?

Sorry if this was discussed earlier in the previous 12K posts...

Stinky

[Guest]

I haven't a clue. Although I think given the mystery surrounding the species, and enough concern over DNA possible errors it is likely?

I see also BFE has picked up the "over the line smokey" expose....and a challenge to Dr. Ketchum. In this long wait we are getting cheeky. I am hoping along with others this week shall reveal her work and responses to such not the feature article, and yet perhaps a real part of this torturous story, for whatever reasons.

Since we seem to be in another lull I want to shift to the concept of DNA and how that can be expressed today in BFs that would make them look both human and something else..

in a PM to a genetics type I ask/postulate this:

what if this actually exists in many fossil lines and we just can not see yet b/c we have no DNA for them...we might find that a radical difference in Erectus were some of the genes expressed?

You might find the poll on Bigfoot Looks like and one I started by accident Bigfoots Face (forgot the other thread as it was lower on the forum and I am not a witness to a face).

here is what I think:

1. eyeshine dramatic

2. possible rhinum - growing evidence (.read carefully really close witness accounts, it seems the hair might prevent us from seeing

3. possible pusedo-opposable thumb (no material culture really)

4. really really hairy!

5, longer arms ratio to legs...seems to be fairly "set" witness

6. mid-tarsal break?

7. some lemurs walk upright and there is rich mythology about supernatural powers and human attributes...(Bfs also have that mythology and NA)

but, BF whistle like humans, better even......

and possible speech

and intelligence that rivals any gorilla, exceeds IMO

so, before my last five week site visit, I was heavily H.erectus...and will be still if this expression in them could be possible? Otherwise I push to more ape like?

is it possible, or probable, and that we need to look in these expressions of lemurs today...? has that been done? I cannot really follow all the DNA/genome stuff published but did post an open access article (I think here, or Bigfoots Face?) on primate genomes...and how our view is changing...anyone?

[southernyahoo]

However, at the same time, many (if not most) of the commentators on this board take seriously the majority of habituation anecdotes. Once again, I am not judging the believability or the veracity of habituation witnesses. I am only pointing out that if habituation stories are taken seriously, then it would be perfectly acceptable to include a sample taken from a blueberry bagel at an habituation site in the Ketchum project. In fact, shouldn't including the bagel in the study be encouraged, given that Ketchum's seemingly advanced DNA testing techniques could possibly confirm the habituation stories?

Short answer Yes, and you'll see in this community how the situation surrounding one research groups claims can now be viewed in the same light as an habituators claims. The pots and kettles are all black now, and the acceptance of repeated encounters in one localized place is a more recent thing.

The research community is still divided on the kill issue. One side see's bigfoot as an animal thus it is Ok to take a specimen while the other see's BF as a member of genus homo and cites the moral and ethical issues involved rendering efforts to focus on DNA collection.

You definately have to watch out for the motivations behind some criticisms.

[Guest]

<p><p>southern yahoo I think you are correct, it does seem we are gravitating to some conventional wisdom on those ideas. And yes, the Kill issue is the justifiable divisive point. It is my emotional trigger, and yet objectively I understand the "need," I struggle more with the "who" shall take that on and for who.

Great points, as well as motivation for all of us to post our views, positive or negative. But, I like this forum for it's strict rules and refocusing us on the "facts" as best we can muster them. I am wondering now how many fossil genomes we have in the paranthopus line? so ubiquitous like erectus, but dating back further right? So keeping the "lemur gene variation" possible....but we dont have boise fossils as recent as erectus right?

so it might be that the lemur genes persisted for sometime unseen?

Edited January 15, 2013 by apehuman