Guest BFSleuth Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 Hutch, I believe the "peep" you heard regarding your request for a polygraph test has been well answered and you yourself have acknowledged they have no value in your response to my post regarding lack of evidence of validity of polygraphs from the APA. I believe we can put that to rest. While I think your question of their vehicle of choice is valid, you could improve your way of questioning. Forum discussion should be with respect to all members. Respectful back and forth discussion is the goal. This is applicable to all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 DF & General should be embracing my line of questioning as it is going to give them a chance to go back and fill in questionable holes in this story. Once they hit the interview circuit for the book that is coming out (whether written by them or someone else) these questions will be hitting them face to face and they cannot run away from them by turning off thier computer monitor. .. Wow, how could they ever resist such a favor you've bestowed upon them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 The Ketchum camp has actually admitted recently that it is choosing to be secret. p. Can you cite your sources for this argument or is it just another one of your opinion arguments you ask us to trust? Tim B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonehead74 Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 DF & General should be embracing my line of questioning as it is going to give them a chance to go back and fill in questionable holes in this story. Once they hit the interview circuit for the book that is coming out (whether written by them or someone else) these questions will be hitting them face to face and they cannot run away from them by turning off thier computer monitor. Hutch, Have you considered the possibility that the answers to these questions will be answered in the book? More to the point, neither you, nor anyone else, are entitled to answers in this matter. Justin and Derek have made numerous statements about the incident. You are free to use logic, reason, and/or bias to make a determination of the truthfulness of their statements. You quite obviously don't believe them, and have used a full 3/4ths of your posts on this forum to make that clear to the rest of us. I think we all understand where you're coming from, but if you believe that you've unmasked Justin's and Dereks's elaborate ruse and then exposed it on a popular (at least for the folks interested in it's subject) internet forum, why stay and badger for clarifying info when it's obvious that no amount of clarification will satisfy you? You've decided it's a hoax. You've shouted it from the BFF's rooftops. We've heard you. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 it's not central to my argument, as you would discover if you would do the research I suggested in my post re major scientific journals, and the admission from the Ketchum camp. Perhaps you could look at those sources, and try to make a counterargument. p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 (edited) it's not central to my argument, as you would discover if you would do the research I suggested in my post re major scientific journals, and the admission from the Ketchum camp. Perhaps you could look at those sources, and try to make a counterargument. p. If it's not central to your argument, why do you continue to bring it up- we are going on months of your banging this argument's gong. I'm just trying to establish the credibility of your argument before I spend more time verifying it. What I've actually done is go directly to the source, Melba Ketchum, Melba Ketchum, a member on this board, and inquired if she did, in fact, say that they were choosing to adhere to the embargo rather than be required by the journal she's working with to follow the embargo. She stated that the journal is still requiring the embargo. She said she could legally share her results but then the journal would not publish her paper. Maybe that's where you got confused- it is, technically, a "choice." So on one hand, I have a nameless board member asking me to accept his argument, and his credentials, on faith. On the other hand, I have an established verified member of the scientific community stating the embargo is required. Be reasonable- who should I believe? Tim B. Edited March 29, 2012 by TimB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest parnassus Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 Can you cite your sources for this argument or is it just another one of your opinion arguments you ask us to trust? Tim B. Tim:here you go. Sally here - There is a lot of chatter on various forums speculating about the peer-review process. YES, authors can CHOOSE to present their findings pre-publication at conferences. YES, they can CHOOSE to share copies of their paper pre-submission. However, Melba did NOT choose to do any of those things. From facebook; if you don't believe this is a true verbatim quote, or if you just want the date and time, please look it up and report back. Otherwise I'll assume you believe it to be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiefoot Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Would what was shared at that conference be held privately as per the conditions of attending the conference? Would those attending conferences normally leak information that other attendees present? Is Bff a scientific conference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 I think I would err on the side of not raising any issues a publication might construe as a violation of embargo, given the controversial nature of the study. In their shoes I think I would CHOOSE to do the same and not ruffle feathers with any editor on the journal staff. Just my opinion. I'm curious Parn, when you released information prior to publication in journals what kinds of modalities did you use? Forum discussions, interviews, teaser articles, or presentations at a conference? Just trying to get a sense of what you think would be allowed in normal course of prepublication activity. Another question is are you aware of anyone that has had a paper rejected from a journal for violating an embargo, and what kind of activity did they do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 I can't access Facebook on this internet connection so it will have to wait until tomorrow to see the entire post as I couldn't find it on my cell. I vaguely remember that post- I believe there was more context to that. I have to say, though, that between satisfying a group of academics expectations as to a paper should be release and following a journal's instructions on release info, I'd have to say the journal of publication would get my priority. Realistically speaking, there are thousands of academics but only a few reviewers- it sounds like they are the priority right now. Tim B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 Guy's - couple quick points.... #1 there is a post above by a certain member, that comes very close to an accusation of lying. Doing so on these boards is not permitted. Check the rules and guidelines if you need clarification. It is one thing to say that you doubt someone's story, it is yet again something completely different to infer, or suggest outright, that its being done intentionally, for personal gain. Doing so, is going to get you some personal time with a member of staff, and will have repurcussions you will not like. #2 The overall tone in this thread is getting heated, and needs to cool down a bit. Alot of arguing over semantics, and points that rely on much supposition and guessing. From there, it turns personal. Please dont make us close the thread for a cooling off period. All discussion is welcome, but please remember to keep it civil, and on topic. Thanks for your attention, and cooperation. -A- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lone Squatcher Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 (edited) Well put Art. P.S Jack Links is now producing bars of Sasquatch Soap, don't make Harry mad, he'll come here and wash out your mouths. LOL Edited March 30, 2012 by Thepattywagon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bobali Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 I am confident that there are ways to get the two dead BFs out of the problem area in which they were killed. Something as simple as a couple of snowmobiles and a strecher on skis for the BFs could have been used. Several machines that are capable of handling much worse conditions have been cited. I don't understand the arguing about whether they were gotten out. It was definitely possible. I am as anxious as any of you for the K........ report to be published. It will be published when Dr K. decides that it is time. I have my own concept of what should take priority at this time. That is observation like Jane Goodall and her chimpanzees. We need to work on developing a method to accompllsh this. It might involve drones and cameras that could transmit data live, or ex-snipers with cameras, or something else. Please come up with several ideas to polish. bobali Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted April 14, 2012 Share Posted April 14, 2012 Missing the point, of course, that by the time they returned to the scene of the killings there was apparently nothing left to recover other than a few bits of flesh. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted April 26, 2012 Share Posted April 26, 2012 I find Justin's story of the waving Sasquatch hard to believe. We aren't really being told everything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts