Ketchum 2.0

[hiflier]

21 minutes ago, norseman said:

Let’s start with the fact that she has never denounced Matilda and the Erickson project for starters

 

NO! For starters go with the results of the 12 labs' independent testing and what it found. Go with what Dr. Haskell Hart did with what he found in those results. Because the scientific process was out of Dr. Ketchum's hands once those samples entered the testing labs. You have not once addressed that because your agenda if couched in the peripherals of what a Human being believes, not in how the science was conducted. The raw data doesn't lie no matter how hard you try to infuse Dr. Ketchum's beliefs into it. It's apples and oranges. It's the DNA's science results that are paramount and it wouldn't matter if Billy Barty or Bozo the clown headed up the project when the actual process of testing those samples wasn't their doing.

 

But you'll never let go of the Human but choose to equate the science with the person. How convenient is that as a backhanded attempt to trash the actual DNA outcomes of the testing. Why not just admit that you don't trust Dr. Haskell Hart's expertise in assessing the raw data of those test results. Is HE getting called into question here as well? I don't give too hoots about Matilda, the Nephilim, angels, unicorns or any other personal beliefs because in the end those things aren't the issue no matter how hard you try to hold them up as reasons to doubt the actual scientific work that was conducted and that produced the raw data. You're a better man than that, Norseman. Trashing the person does NOT equate to trashing the study no matter how you twist it and harp on the things that nothing to do with the test outcomes.

 

And that's why I've always called your position into question. Because where the science is concerned, all you do is try to but a dark cloud over it by concentrating on Dr. Ketchum's PERSONAL beliefs and weaknesses and then transfer those things onto the study itself. And it's been obvious that that's what you've been doing for tears every chance you get. I think you're hoping that if you keep at it that others will join you in allowing character assassination to overshadow raw genetic data results. It has to stop because there's no reason for the SCIENCE to suffer simply because YOU have a problem with a PERSON. Dr. Hart had issues with her data also but still went through everything and found enough GOOD data put his chart together. And isn't GOOD DATA what we're after? But you never talk about that and I have to seriously ask why not? Am I the only one of a very few who can look past Ketchum as a Human Being and be more concerned with how the study turned out?

 

And one last thing, I have seen you say man/bear/pig for years but I have YET to seeo say, "Wow, there's no man/bear/pig in what Dr. Hart pulled out of the data. So stop slanting everything to Ketchum as an excuse for not seeing what's truly there. Because if you don't then I have no choice to keep thinking that your focus on Ketchum somehow gives you permission to try and pull everyone's eyes off the far more important outcomes of the work.

   

[ThePhaige]

47 minutes ago, norseman said:

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.

 

 

There is nothing new under the sun Norse... we been talking about this and the whos who in our generation, oh for say 40 years... Thinking its the Gov is a little narrow in my mind, this is a globally active thing and its information that has been kinetic for thousands of years... When PG came out is when most people seem to think this whole Bigfoot thing started... when in reality its closer to the end.  

 

I think she has become very useful in ways you suggest but not in the ways most might expect... perhaps you do.

 

Personally I think she is compromised on several levels, and I cant really say it any better than that... folks understand what I mean

 

So Im not beating around the bush as this seems like common knowledge at this point no? 

Who do you think it is that comes out and tells the homeowner... nope it was a Bear you saw Mr Jones... 

I wonder do they even know who sent them... cheers

 

 

 

[norseman]

7 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

NO! For starters go with the results of the 12 labs' independent testing and what it found. Go with what Dr. Haskell Hart did with what he found in those results. Because the scientific process was out of Dr. Ketchum's hands once those samples entered the testing labs. You have not once addressed that because your agenda if couched in the peripherals of what a Human being believes, not in how the science was conducted. The raw data doesn't lie no matter how hard you try to infuse Dr. Ketchum's beliefs into it. It's apples and oranges. It's the DNA's science results that are paramount and it wouldn't matter if Billy Barty or Bozo the clown headed up the project when the actual process of testing those samples wasn't their doing.

 

But you'll never let go of the Human but choose to equate the science with the person. How convenient is that as a backhanded attempt to trash the actual DNA outcomes of the testing. Why not just admit that you don't trust Dr. Haskell Hart's expertise in assessing the raw data of those test results. Is HE getting called into question here as well? I don't give too hoots about Matilda, the Nephilim, angels, unicorns or any other personal beliefs because in the end those things aren't the issue no matter how hard you try to hold them up as reasons to doubt the actual scientific work that was conducted and that produced the raw data. You're a better man than that, Norseman. Trashing the person does NOT equate to trashing the study no matter how you twist it and harp on the things that nothing to do with the test outcomes.

 

And that's why I've always called your position into question. Because where the science is concerned, all you do is try to but a dark cloud over it by concentrating on Dr. Ketchum's PERSONAL beliefs and weaknesses and then transfer those things onto the study itself. And it's been obvious that that's what you've been doing for tears every chance you get. I think you're hoping that if you keep at it that others will join you in allowing character assassination to overshadow raw genetic data results. It has to stop because there's no reason for the SCIENCE to suffer simply because YOU have a problem with a PERSON. Dr. Hart had issues with her data also but still went through everything and found enough GOOD data put his chart together. And isn't GOOD DATA what we're after? But you never talk about that and I have to seriously ask why not? Am I the only one of a very few who can look past Ketchum as a Human Being and be more concerned with how the study turned out?

 

And one last thing, I have seen you say man/bear/pig for years but I have YET to seeo say, "Wow, there's no man/bear/pig in what Dr. Hart pulled out of the data. So stop slanting everything to Ketchum as an excuse for not seeing what's truly there. Because if you don't then I have no choice to keep thinking that your focus on Ketchum somehow gives you permission to try and pull everyone's eyes off the far more important outcomes of the work.

   

I think you have no idea what’s in the data Hiflier and you’re just swallowing Melba Ketchum hook, line and sinker. You don’t wanna address Ketchum’s hoaxing and crazy beliefs because again you’re on the Melba Ketchum train. 
 

You do this. You got on the pro kill kick and wrote a book. Now you’re not. Several kicks later? You’re a full on Melba Ketchum disciple! A year from now? Who knows?

 

Either way? I will be here patiently waiting for Melba Ketchum after thousands of dollars and a bunch of podcasts explain why the meanie heads won’t accept her shoddy work…..🤦🏻‍♂️

[See-Te-Cah NC]

NDAs coming soon. Must be big!

 

[hiflier]

9 hours ago, norseman said:

You don’t wanna address Ketchum’s hoaxing and crazy beliefs because again you’re on the Melba Ketchum train

 

Keep twisting it to your agenda however way you wish. I'm on the DNA train, period, and you know it and it has nothing to do with Ketchum or her beliefs. I rose above that a long time ago. But will say anything you can think of to paint that as some kind of error. And do me a favor, don't you EVER throw my Sasquatch Hunting book in my face again. Yes, I was pro kill, but I learn things, educate myself constantly in genetics, and grow. I am not stuck under a rock and spinning my wheels like you. Genetics is new school in the BF study and a powerful tool it is, which is to say that it's NOT for the dark ages.

 

Besides, if you have ever even read my book you would know that I questioned the pro kill stance in the chapter titled "To Shoot Or Not To Shoot." And laid out the psychological, moral, and social issues of doing such a thing. I also wrote that the book was also for folks who would rather shoot with a camera. So keep the book out of this and any future discussions if you please. Because I dislike very much that the only time you ever bring it up is to use it as some kind of stick across my back. Grow up.

 

Edited June 9, 2023 by hiflier

[norseman]

45 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

Keep twisting it to your agenda however way you wish. I'm on the DNA train, period, and you know it and it has nothing to do with Ketchum or her beliefs. I rose above that a long time ago. But will say anything you can think of to paint that as some kind of error. And do me a favor, don't you EVER throw my Sasquatch Hunting book in my face again. Yes, I was pro kill, but I learn things, educate myself constantly in genetics, and grow. I am not stuck under a rock and spinning my wheels like you. Genetics is new school in the BF study and a powerful tool it is, which is to say that it's NOT for the dark ages.

 

Besides, if you have ever even read my book you would know that I questioned the pro kill stance in the chapter titled "To Shoot Or Not To Shoot." And laid out the psychological, moral, and social issues of doing such a thing. I also wrote that the book was also for folks who would rather shoot with a camera. So keep the book out of this and any future discussions if you please. Because I dislike very much that the only time you ever bring it up is to use it as some kind of stick across my back. Grow up.

 

How is your mail list going? Have you got any officials to spill the beans about Bigfoot? Or did you give up on that too?

 

You can tell me to “grow up” all you would like. I’ve had 3 spine surgeries and 2 heart attacks in the last ten years. And I still manage to get out into the woods with a rifle…. Life is good!
 

So you can take your rock and spinning wheels somewhere else Hiflier….

[norseman]

2 hours ago, See-Te-Cah NC said:

NDAs coming soon. Must be big!

 

Her DeNovo site charged 30 bucks to download her “DNA study” aka pseudo science report on Bigfoot.

 

She must have not sold enough tickets! 🤦🏻‍♂️

[hiflier]

55 minutes ago, norseman said:

How is your mail list going? Have you got any officials to spill the beans about Bigfoot? Or did you give up on that too?

 

Ain't given up on anything, LOL. I do things you wouldn't DARE do. Do I get ghosted? Sure, it's to be expected. But do I just shrug, say, "oh well, that's the way it goes" and then simply walk away? Nope. Do you have a case number with the Dept. of Agriculture? No? Well, sir, I do. Cause I'm afraid of.....NO ONE! And I'm not afraid of anyone in this community either, Meldrum, Disotell, you...no one.

 

55 minutes ago, norseman said:

I’ve had 3 spine surgeries and 2 heart attacks in the last ten years. And I still manage to get out into the woods with a rifle…. Life is good!

 

Life IS good, Norseman, even after they cracked my chest for a triple bypass a few years ago. I'm 74 and yes, I still go into the woods (with a DNA kit and a 7" blade), hike trails, and do everything I did before. Had my share of surgeries, too. But I don't hold those things up as some kind of banner. Because that stuff is just life on life's terms  

 

55 minutes ago, norseman said:

So you can take your rock and spinning wheels somewhere else Hiflier….

 

Too late. I scientifically have left you in the dust years ago. It's why I can argue by putting Ketchum's results and Disotell's CLAIMED results into the same boat. There's a clarity there that only I can see? And Huntster? But you won't confront any of that now will you. And you know why? Because you hate it when I'm right. Get Disotell to show his work, his raw DNA data results and then maybe we can talk. But you have to be asking yourself, my friend, why is it that I'm ever the only one who pursues the hard things? And then stand my ground with sound logic while no one else does crap or even discusses such things? I would really like to see a lot more backbone around here. But it would seem, from what I can see, that there isn't much in the way of that. Huntster is a lion amongst house cats. He knows. He gets it. You don't. Or can't. Or won't for whatever reason.

 

But it's kinda obvious that most everyone has steered clear of this thread. And you have steered clear of anything I've brought up in the way of scientific facts, or at least of shadowy test results out of the Washington nest discoveries and the issue of the gatekeepers of the full picture of information concerning them. All it does is make me wish you were more of a warrior for the truth than you have been. You carry a ton of weight on this Forum and could be a real force for truth. But you bob and weave around with indirect sideline battles that say it just isn't going to happen. Ah well..... 

Edited June 9, 2023 by hiflier

[norseman]

9 minutes ago, hiflier said:

 

Ain't given up on anything, LOL. I do things you wouldn't DARE do. Do I get ghosted? Sure, it's to be expected. But do I just shrug, say, "oh well, that's the way it goes" and then simply walk away? Nope. Do you have a case number with the Dept. of Agriculture? No? Well, sir, I do. Cause I'm afraid of.....NO ONE! And I'm not afraid of anyone in this community either, Meldrum, Disotell, you...no one.

 

 

Life IS good, Norseman, even after they cracked my chest for a triple bypass a few years ago. I'm 74 and yes, I still go into the woods (with a DNA kit and a 7" blade), hike trails, and do everything I did before. Had my share of surgeries, too. But I don't hold those things up as some kind of banner. Because that stuff is just life on life's terms  

 

 

Too late. I scientifically have left you in the dust years ago. It why I can argue by putting Ketchum's results and Disotell's CLAIMED results into the same boat. But you won't confront any of that now will you. And you know why? Because you hate it when I'm right. Get Disotell to show his work, his raw DNA data results and then maybe we can talk. But you have to be asking yourself, my friend, why is it that I'm ever the only one who pursues the hard things? And then stand my ground with sound logic while no one else does crap or even discusses such things? I would really like to see a lot more backbone around here. But it would seem, from what I can see, that there isn't much in the way of that. Huntster is a lion amongst house cats. He knows. He gets it. You don't. Or can't. Or won't for whatever reason.

 

But it's kinda obvious that most everyone has steered clear of this thread. And you have steered clear of anything I've brought up in the way of scientific facts, or at least of shadowy test results out of the Washington nest discoveries and the issue of the gatekeepers of the full picture of information concerning them. All it does is make me wish you were more of a warrior for the truth than you have been. You carry a ton of weight on this Forum and could be a real force for truth but you're sideline battles say it just isn't going to happen. Ah well..... 

 

I do things you wouldn’t dare to do as well.

 

Like hunt Bigfoot in Grizzly country with a rifle….👍

 

This thread is the laughing stock of the forum Hiflier! Do you know how many personal messages I get about this? It’s a free country and I am a firm believer in caveat emptor…. People get screwed by people like Melba Ketchum and just come right back for more!🤷‍♂️ It’s their right to do so….

 

That doesn’t mean I wont call it for what it is….loud and clear.

[Huntster]

2 hours ago, hiflier said:

.........Yes, I was pro kill, but I learn things, educate myself constantly in genetics, and grow. I am not stuck under a rock and spinning my wheels........

 

Hear, Hear!

 

I was also pro-kill.........and still am. But there's no way in Hell I'll squeeze the trigger on one unless it's attacking me. It's not that I'm too moral to kill a creature like that. I'm more terrified of the authorities than I am of the boogerman. Even if I shot one in self defense I'd probably just walk away, knowing that's what the government would want me to do. 

 

Or I suppose I could follow the letter of the law and report the shooting using very careful language:

 

"I was attacked by a feral man, and I had to shoot him. You can find him at these GPS coordinates. Now excuse me, I need to go to Holy Confession and find a good therapist to help me with my trauma..........."

 

Quote

........Besides, if you have ever even read my book you would know that I questioned the pro kill stance in the chapter titled "To Shoot Or Not To Shoot." And laid out the psychological, moral, and social issues of doing such a thing.........

 

Never mind the morality within your own soul. Science doesn't want you to shoot one. I quoted one of the peers on Ketchum's peer review with Nature (with link) who chastised Ketchum for using a sample (blood) that had been acquired at a shooting event. He/she used the morality of the shooting to provide the sample! Ketchum replied that the shooting information would be stricken from the report.

 

If there was ever any evidence of what a pro-kill advocate was up against, there it it. Shooting a sasquatch is legal suicide, and Science will gladly pillory you for the government and eco-kooks to persecute.

[Huntster]

1 hour ago, Huntster said:

.......Never mind the morality within your own soul. Science doesn't want you to shoot one. I quoted one of the peers on Ketchum's peer review with Nature (with link) who chastised Ketchum for using a sample (blood) that had been acquired at a shooting event. He/she used the morality of the shooting to provide the sample! Ketchum replied that the shooting information would be stricken from the report.

 

If there was ever any evidence of what a pro-kill advocate was up against, there it it. Shooting a sasquatch is legal suicide, and Science will gladly pillory you for the government and eco-kooks to persecute.

 

More from Reviewer #1 in Nature's peer review of Ketchum's manuscript:

 

http://sasquatchgenomeproject.org/linked/author_responses_to_referees__first_review.pdf

 

Quote

.......5. -- Terminology seems odd and needs changing
The terminology used throughout this manuscript, and the conclusions the authors reach, seem inappropriate in view of the evidence. Indeed, the title tells us that evidence for a 'new species' is presented, yet the authors actually end up naming a new 'subspecies'. I am definitely of the opinion that the naming of a new taxon seems inappropriate at this stage (it is likely to be about as accepted as Meldrum's suggested ichnotaxonomic name _Anthropoidipes ameriborealis_), and I would also add that the chosen name ('_Homo sapiens feralis_') is odd and highly problematic (use google to see what I mean). It is stated throughout the ms that the animal is of hybrid origin. If this is so, it is highly debatable as to whether or not taxonomic novelty is warranted........

 

Doesn't this ring bells? We've been flooded from Science over the past 10-15 years about how the human population has genetic traces of both Neanderthals and Denisovans. Now Ketchum, Sykes, and Margaryan have established that purported sasquatches/almastys are H U M A N, with mdna being 100% Homo Sapien. This makes these creatures Homo Sapien, perhaps feral, or (if their ndna is unknown) a hybrid or new species.

 

Legally, if Meldrum's ichnotaxonomic name (Anthropoidipes ameriborealis) is accepted, it is not of the genus Homo. Killing one cannot be homicide, by definition.

 

Unfortunately, the scientific evidence currently makes them human. Kill one at your peril.

[Bigfoot Ed]

Anything that has to do with religion requires "FAITH". Faith is belief without proof. Science is about proving ideas wrong. Whatever is left is assumed to be true at that moment, until proof to the contrary appears. 

Leave all things nephilim at the laboratory door. Melba and her ilk are tedious, frequently pedantic and always exasperating. 

 

[hiflier]

4 hours ago, norseman said:

I do things you wouldn’t dare to do as well.

 

Like hunt Bigfoot in Grizzly country with a rifle….👍

 

Well, since I don't own guns, which you already know, then it would be kinda stupid doncha think?

 

But if I did own guns, sure, I'd go. And why not.

 

4 hours ago, norseman said:

This thread is the laughing stock of the forum Hiflier! Do you know how many personal messages I get about this?

 

And that is important how? Does it address Dr. Disotell's ambiguous announcement? You know the one, right? Where he hinted LOUDLY that the nest builders were genus Homo? Nope. Does it address Dr. Haskell Hart's chart of rare Human mutations that are common in OTHER primates? Nope. Does it say ANYTHING AT ALL about what's important to discovery? Nope. Nada. Zero. So, I'm hardly impressed and it it really doesn't mean a hill of beans to me. But what it DOES do is squirm away from scientific arguments and distract (as usual) from them. Good job playing the diversion card once again. 

[MIB]

19 minutes ago, Bigfoot Ed said:

Anything that has to do with religion requires "FAITH". Faith is belief without proof. Science is about proving ideas wrong.

 

For the sake of argument, there are things we more or less universally accept as true even though very few among us have the ability to verify them ourselves.    We are limited to taking the word of presumed experts or worse, what the media represents as the word of those the same media wants us to believe are experts and we do it without even batting an eye.    I believe we need to be more skeptical, more rigorous, when viewing commonly accepted "truths" even in the world of science.   

[Bigfoot Ed]

Just as a qualifier I have a bachelor's in religious studies as well as anthropology so I have a little bit of both sides of this subject. There is no physical evidence that  even remotely accepted by anyone who is regarded as a scientist. I've read meldrum's books I've seen the footprints the casts even the skookum cast it's still not evidence. Any ideas that Sasquatch could be the remainder from a biblical beast are purely faith-based and bordering on the mythic. It's exasperating because these ideas cannot be proven wrong and they can't be proven right so they don't belong in science. And while we're at it there's absolutely no way that Sasquatch and or Bigfoot could have anything to do with gigantopithecus which is almost entirely regarded as a quadruped that went extinct around the time of homo erectus. Who probably have something to do with it. 

We just touch on the North American ape issue so far science which is what we're trying to use here says there are no North American apes!! This is a