Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I think her MK Davis's enhanced Mike Sells videos are going to be her selling point on this magnificent paper. Didn't she say it was in peer review and would be published in a prestigious journal? I'm a little confused here. Does she consider this an esteemed scientific peer reviewed publication? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I still can't get over her blatant disregard for correct capitalization, and punctuation in a majority of her posts. You'd think that a doctor would find things like that important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I still can't get over her blatant disregard for correct capitalization, and punctuation in a majority of her posts. You'd think that a doctor would find things like that important. I presume that she's typing from her smartphone where it becomes a hassle to correctly punctuate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I still can't get over her blatant disregard for correct capitalization, and punctuation in a majority of her posts. You'd think that a doctor would find things like that important. Not to attack Ketchum personally, but it's my understanding that, at the time (1970's) when she obtained her degree in veterinary medicine from Texas A&M, Texas law only required two years of schooling for someone to practice in the field and I doubt that the program mandated that she complete many English courses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I still can't get over her blatant disregard for correct capitalization, and punctuation in a majority of her posts. You'd think that a doctor would find things like that important. Never seen docs and vets write their script pads?Takes a degree just to read most of em... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Press release now on Yahoo. http://news.yahoo.com/researchers-sequence-sasquatch-genome-novel-hominins-extant-north-054020736.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 Well not that I doubt her integrity, but if her papers have problems with getting peer reviewed, then there is a problem there of sorts. Also, I think she should release the HD footage first, to gain the trust first? I would definately go that way round - footage and then studies if I were her? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I still can't get over her blatant disregard for correct capitalization, and punctuation in a majority of her posts. You'd think that a doctor would find things like that important. Yes Doctors' handwriting are well known for complete disarray, but their typing and grammar is usually pretty good I think. However, she is probably just stressed out as it is afterall a RACE as she is competing with other scientists as we speak!! haha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted February 13, 2013 BFF Patron Share Posted February 13, 2013 (edited) Another PRWeb hosted release, Yahoo just the same, where are the major news organizations/ Reporters should be on this at embargo? Erickson page has a phone number contact for him, that is it as far as I can see. Dna Diagnostics is now masthead for sasquatchgenomeproject.org with news release under press releases now. Edited February 13, 2013 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bipedalist Posted February 13, 2013 BFF Patron Share Posted February 13, 2013 (edited) Not to attack Ketchum personally, but it's my understanding that, at the time (1970's) when she obtained her degree in veterinary medicine from Texas A&M, Texas law only required two years of schooling for someone to practice in the field and I doubt that the program mandated that she complete many English courses. Here they come starting to bring up her educational "coursework" and not her certifications and qualifications. Her work will stand on it's on online publication or NOT. Maybe some copyrighted/trademarked genome sequences would be available for select scientists to drool over as data? Edited February 13, 2013 by bipedalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 The paper will be what it'll be. BUT, the more important issue, this should free up those involved under the NDA's correct? Erickson, Derek Randles, Smeja, etc. Finally they can speak freely and share their evidence?! Show me the squatches! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 (edited) I've got a slightly different take. Purportedly there are a number of bigfoot-related video products that are in various stages of production, and perhaps ready for distribution, that have been held back until the study is published. The people who put money into these things typically demand that they see a return within a given amount of time. If such products and investors exist, and if they have agreed to hold back until the study is published, then Ketchum, et al. would be under tremendous pressure, perhaps even a contractual deadline, to publish the study and allow the media to be released. Regardless, there's a synergy. The study requires supporting evidence that the general public can embrace to back it up (I'm talking video). At the same time a video product will benefit from the buzz and controversy surrounding the study's release. And the skeptic organizations will have a field day. Everybody who's positioned to make money is going to make money. Edited February 13, 2013 by JDL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Theagenes Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 I'm sorry but this is a joke. I would have had more respect for her if she had just admitted that it didn't make it through review and had simply published her data in a white paper for everyone to see. Instead she's created a fake journal to give her article the false impression that it is legitimately peer-reviewed. That is borderline fraud/hoax. I have defended her and given her the benefit of the doubt up to this point, thinking that maybe she had legitimately interesting data, but was maybe going too far in her interpretation. We'll see what it says, but under these circumstances it becomes difficult to trust her paper, regardless of what it says. As for the co-authors, they are probably legit, but my guess is they are just the directors of the various labs that performed the testing and have nothing to do with the actual substance of the paper. This is a real bummer. I don't why everyone is so excited---this is not a good sign at all. The only good thing about this is that we can have closure and await Sykes' results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 She has consistently said if mainstream science won't publish that she would self publish so that doesn't throw me. I think of John Green and Dr Bindernagel who have always maintained that science has it's own bias on the subject of sasquatch. I've read their books on the subject so it makes sense to me that self publishing is a viable road to getting the paper there. The science is what matters to me. If the work has been done correctly, and I'll have to weigh what the experts say as I'm not qualified to make that judgement, that is the core issue on this work. If those 3 full genomes match and were done by different labs using 3 separate sources, ie, one blood, one saliva, one tissue, it will be pretty heavy evidence. American enterprise is all about making money so if she can make money off this well that's the American way. We shall see. Those who have an agenda for not giving this paper a fair shake will never accept it and that's fine with me, as for me I'm certainly going to give this paper a real chance with an open mind to prove something to science. Shoot I've thought out of the box my whole life and I'm not gonna change now, I'm to old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted February 13, 2013 Share Posted February 13, 2013 And so the pre-scripted responses are posted well in advance of the release of information. Has anyone considered the fact that you'll be able to respond to the actual data soon and to judge it in advance takes away from your argument? Just consider the fact that you don't know what it is you are talking about yet, huh? Tim B. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts