Ketchum 2.0

[larryzed]

Just now, Huntster said:

 

Spitting at the administration? Dumb, but expected from you..............

 

Thats about what Mrs Huntster said last night. Enjoy being grifted.

[Incorrigible1]

1 hour ago, larryzed said:

 

Threats from the Admins? Classy..

 

Oh, good heavens. Now you're a victim. Good grief. Wah.

[larryzed]

1 minute ago, Incorrigible1 said:

 

Oh, good heavens. Now you're a victim. Good grief. Wah.

 

Or you have no reading comorehension skills, much like the somewhat loose Mrs. Huntster

[Incorrigible1]

2 minutes ago, larryzed said:

 

Or you have no reading comorehension skills, much like the somewhat loose Mrs. Huntster

 

Or you're majorly concerned with creating drama.

[larryzed]

36 minutes ago, Incorrigible1 said:

 

Or you're majorly concerned with creating drama.

Or.... I was attacked for speaking the truth to the weak minded. Not my problem his Mrs. Gets around.

[Incorrigible1]

35 minutes ago, larryzed said:

Or.... I was attacked for speaking the truth to the weak minded. Not my problem his Mrs. Gets around.

 

Gosh, what a gentle, fragile flower you are.

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, larryzed said:

..........I was attacked for speaking the truth to the weak minded..........

 

"Attacked"? I didn't even disagree with YOUR attack on Ketchum. I agreed that she made huge mistakes in several ways........just not technical in her dna work. I simply stated that the dna work, performed at several labs, much of it blind, and it all confirming the various labs involved pretty much stands uncontested. The very first words in the first round of peer review from the first peer admitted that he/she wasn't a geneticist and wasn't qualified to review the work. I quoted that peer and provided the reference.

 

So that is an "attack" on you? And for that brazen offense, you drag the very beautiful and ultra sweet Mrs. Huntster into your scientific review with aspersions regarding her purity?

 

My, my, Larry. Looks to me like you exemplify the very problem here. You're not a scientist. You're an ideologue defending his ideology, and doing so with viciousness. 

[ThePhaige]

6 hours ago, Huntster said:

 

"Attacked"? I didn't even disagree with YOUR attack on Ketchum. I agreed that she made huge mistakes in several ways........just not technical in her dna work. I simply stated that the dna work, performed at several labs, much of it blind, and it all confirming the various labs involved pretty much stands uncontested. The very first words in the first round of peer review from the first peer admitted that he/she wasn't a geneticist and wasn't qualified to review the work. I quoted that peer and provided the reference.

 

So that is an "attack" on you? And for that brazen offense, you drag the very beautiful and ultra sweet Mrs. Huntster into your scientific review with aspersions regarding her purity?

 

My, my, Larry. Looks to me like you exemplify the very problem here. You're not a scientist. You're an ideologue defending his ideology, and doing so with viciousness. 

 

Simple tactics.. projection... never let shilly wabbitz get to ya...  They are inconvincible yet know more than most in many cases... ya dig

[norseman]

Look people…. We are not your enemy. And we are not the people you need to convince. Most people here are proponents of Bigfoot, myself included.

 

But Melba Ketchum needs to convince the scientific community that her DNA study is valid. I’m pretty sure if that happens I will hear about it.

 

I’ve said my peace and warned people about giving her money. 👍

[ThePhaige]

5 minutes ago, norseman said:

Look people…. We are not your enemy. And we are not the people you need to convince. Most people here are proponents of Bigfoot, myself included.

 

But Melba Ketchum needs to convince the scientific community that her DNA study is valid. I’m pretty sure if that happens I will hear about it.

 

I’ve said my peace and warned people about giving her money. 👍

 

People? who would that include?

We? who is that exactly?

Wouldn't everyone hear about it ?

 

Science convinces people but is always open to new information ... in this case it has... but not because there weren't already thousands or more already convinced and really had not a need for this. Doesn't mean folks cant be hopeful , but for me its more akin to wishful. 

 

When you have them on your property (hope ya never do) we shall see if you turn to science for help? or to be convinced? , or will you lean on what you saw and experienced that lines up with tons of other folks?... I guess when that happens I will hear about it? 

 

I would say people can donate to whatever cause they see fit, however sending money to someone who says they are going to set the world on fire with their shiny new SSQ DNA study should already register as a non sequitur... You should by now see clearly... what is.  

[norseman]

1 hour ago, ThePhaige said:

 

People? who would that include?

We? who is that exactly?

Wouldn't everyone hear about it ?

 

Science convinces people but is always open to new information ... in this case it has... but not because there weren't already thousands or more already convinced and really had not a need for this. Doesn't mean folks cant be hopeful , but for me its more akin to wishful. 

 

When you have them on your property (hope ya never do) we shall see if you turn to science for help? or to be convinced? , or will you lean on what you saw and experienced that lines up with tons of other folks?... I guess when that happens I will hear about it? 

 

I would say people can donate to whatever cause they see fit, however sending money to someone who says they are going to set the world on fire with their shiny new SSQ DNA study should already register as a non sequitur... You should by now see clearly... what is.  

Probably the people who are not  “they”….

 

“Simple tactics.. projection... never let shilly wabbitz get to ya...  They are inconvincible yet know more than most in many cases... ya dig”

 

I witnessed tracks on my family ranch in 1980.

 

Word games… I see Melba Ketchum’s work as a dumpster fire. I do know that IT IS….

[ThePhaige]

6 minutes ago, norseman said:

Probably the people who are not  “they”….

 

“Simple tactics.. projection... never let shilly wabbitz get to ya...  They are inconvincible yet know more than most in many cases... ya dig”

 

I witnessed tracks on my family ranch in 1980.

 

Word games… I see Melba Ketchum’s work as a dumpster fire. I do know that IT IS….

 

Oh I see you quoted me there as if I was speaking about you? or that was aimed at you? 

I was speaking to the inconvincible who is clearly not you, right? 

 

I mean surely if you saw or interacted with a SSQ you would see things from a totally different perspective just as I and many others have before... I get it man,  Im not talking about a genuine skeptic that when he actually sees , he believes, and knows a thing as fact... Im talking about a more forceful and funded opposition

 

One last though you said: I do know that IT IS

I would ask How exactly?

 

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, ThePhaige said:

People? who would that include?........

 

Sasquatches.

[norseman]

59 minutes ago, ThePhaige said:

 

Oh I see you quoted me there as if I was speaking about you? or that was aimed at you? 

I was speaking to the inconvincible who is clearly not you, right? 

 

I mean surely if you saw or interacted with a SSQ you would see things from a totally different perspective just as I and many others have before... I get it man,  Im not talking about a genuine skeptic that when he actually sees , he believes, and knows a thing as fact... Im talking about a more forceful and funded opposition

 

One last though you said: I do know that IT IS

I would ask How exactly?

 

When it comes to Ketchum? I’m thoroughly NOT convinced.

 

Can you stop beating around the bush please? Are you talking about the US government? As I stated before. While the government may or may not interfere? Melba Ketchum would be the least of their worries. In fact it’s so bad? She may work for them….

 

Let’s start with the fact that she has never denounced Matilda and the Erickson project for starters…. this hoax could have been perpetrated by a couple of kids and a Star Wars costume! Standings muppet heads are better and that is saying something.

[Huntster]

The most tragic part of the Ketchum story, like so many before her, is the resulting precedent and stigma. We can see this with the PG film. First, Science largely ignores it, government completely (and conspicuously) ignores it, the producer of the evidence is attacked and discounted, and the few qualified scientists who publish comments write that it just has to be a hoax, but they have no idea how it was done. Over the subsequent years, as people analyze it and bring up pertinent facts, the skeptic industry mobilize to drive a stake in its heart with a Greg Long style fabrication which then becomes the newest reality paraded by the media. The whole while that same media machine makes bank with bigfoot cartoons, commercials, and silly movies.

 

Ketchum screwed this up big time. They don't even have to stir up a Greg Long or Margaryan to finish this off. It's over.........except for her published data. They can discredit her and even attack the data, but they cannot make it disappear now. 

 

Will sasquatchery be arguing about Melba Ketchum 50 years from now? Oh, you'd better believe they will. There are two main reasons for that:

 

1) Government, even more than the high priests of Science, simply cannot allow these creatures to be discovered. They are every bit as dangerous to government as little green men from outer space. So this mystery continues on beyond all our lifespans.

 

2) Over the ensuing years, more and more data supporting the Ketchum study will be produced by others. Each entity who does so will be destroyed like Ketchum or quickly countered like Sykes was. But the reality will eventually take root:

 

These creatures are human. Homo Somethings. We won't be going back to "apes", regardless how badly some folks want to.