norseman Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 6 minutes ago, Huntster said: Wait! You're missing the dna analyzed by 11 different labs, independently, and blind. When you add that to your book, I'll gladly read it. My daughter and her family are eyeball deep in peccaries right now near Tucson. Some of them might be manpigs!........ Uh huh…. Just like Matilda isn’t a Chewbacca costume and DeNovo is a legit peer reviewed publisher not owned by Melba Ketchum.🤥 You bought the sea monkeys out of the back of the comic book as a kid didn’t you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 16 minutes ago, norseman said: Neither. The premise of your question is flawed. Bill Munns is not presenting a novel species to science. A Kodak 16mm camera is not a living species………. Bill has been performing a scientific analysis on a film of a purported sasquatch. As a result of his detailed analysis, which he has documented, his opinion is that it is, indeed, what we call a “sasquatch” in the film. I do not believe his work has been peer reviewed. So you say that Bill’s scientific analysis, self published, is valid because he isn’t claiming that a new creature exists, but that the subject seen in the film is just an ordinary sasquatch? Quote ……… You know I love you?…….. Yeah, I do. I love you, too. Quote ………But I cannot talk to you about biology. I’ve tried every angle I can think of to get you to see what is wrong with Melba Ketchum! Either you lack the understanding. Or you will not admit it.🤷♂️ ……… I understand your problems with her, and I share them. Unfortunately, neither that, the peer review questions from Nature that she published, and similar dna results elsewhere can explain away her results. It doesn’t matter than nobody likes her explanation. She has found something. Quote …….It’s like asking for a red Ryder BB gun for Christmas. And when Christmas morning comes? And I rip open the bright shiny gift? Inside there is a card board cut out of a red Ryder BB gun….🤨 That happened to Mrs. Huntster as a kid. She wanted a certain doll for Christmas. There was a nice, big box wrapped up for her. She unwrapped it to find a smaller wrapped box inside. The trick was repeated again. Then again. Then again, still. Finally, the last, little box had a little, teeny troll doll in it. She broke down crying. Then Dad pulled out the doll she wanted. Cruel trick. She remembers it to this day. But she got her doll. And I got Ketchums manuscript. And Nature’s peer comments. And her replies. None of it condemned the results. There’s a doll in that box somewhere………. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 23 minutes ago, norseman said: Uh huh…. Just like Matilda isn’t a Chewbacca costume and DeNovo is a legit peer reviewed publisher not owned by Melba Ketchum.🤥 You bought the sea monkeys out of the back of the comic book as a kid didn’t you? LOL! Of course not. I spent my money on BB guns, archery equipment, and knives. Mrs. Huntster bought them, though. She lived in Ogden, too……..recognized them immediately as brine shrimp, probably from the Great Salt Laje. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 (edited) I have a book, too. It's not peer reviewed by science but it is self-published and I do charge people money to read it. But it also isn't nearly the argument that Bill Munns' book is (which he charges money for as well) and it doesn't try to lay out facts and details trying to convince anyone that the creature is real. Oh, and I love all of you....no matter what I might also add that Dr. Haskell V. Hart ALSO charges money for HIS book and it's....um....ALSO self-published and un-peer reviewed- even though it's loaded with genetic science. My guess though is this: People would still believe HIS un-peer reviewed book over Ketchum's five year study, which Hart himself said (LIVE on radio) probably shows Sasquatch DNA. Go figure. Edited June 11, 2023 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 3 hours ago, hiflier said: I have a book, too. It's not peer reviewed by science but it is self-published and I do charge people money to read it. But it also isn't nearly the argument that Bill Munns' book is (which he charges money for as well) and it doesn't try to lay out facts and details trying to convince anyone that the creature is real. Oh, and I love all of you....no matter what I might also add that Dr. Haskell V. Hart ALSO charges money for HIS book and it's....um....ALSO self-published and un-peer reviewed- even though it's loaded with genetic science. My guess though is this: People would still believe HIS un-peer reviewed book over Ketchum's five year study, which Hart himself said (LIVE on radio) probably shows Sasquatch DNA. Go figure. People write books all the time. People charge money for books. Yes. People DO NOT charge for biological discoveries however. Science works on testable and repeatable results. Scientists WANT their work peer reviewed because they want their work validated! They do not charge money in this process. And usually the layman cannot read the peer reviewed paper on the discovery because it’s over their head. Instead they read about it in a peer reviewed publisher magazine or a press release about the article in the peer reviewed publisher’s magazine. Fine? Then Dr. Hart should scrape the train wreck off the wall and write a paper and resubmit it for peer review….. it’s been what? 10 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 Anyone want a pair of Melba Ketchum signed earrings?🤔 https://sasquatchthelegend.com/collections/dr-melba-ketchum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, norseman said: ........Science works on testable and repeatable results. Scientists WANT their work peer reviewed because they want their work validated! They do not charge money in this process. And usually the layman cannot read the peer reviewed paper on the discovery because it’s over their head. Instead they read about it in a peer reviewed publisher magazine or a press release about the article in the peer reviewed publisher’s magazine........... And all that is fine. As a layman, I wanted to read it and glean what I could. But Nature didn't publish. Ketchum tried to appeal, but no documentation from Nature to her has been published. So she self-published. Now, if somebody wants to condemn that as heresy and thus disregard very word of her manuscript, that's fine with me. If the scientific community wants to repeatedly point out that her manuscript is thusly impossible to consider, that, too, is fine with me. It has been painfully obvious for the past half century that there is a majority within the Science industry hostile to all things sasquatchery, and it would be foolish to believe that's going away, even after discovery. And even though I have no background, education, or even interest in the details of genetic science, I'm certainly capable of reading peer review questions and responses, especially since virtually none of it was about the genetic science, and the vast majority was about her opinions, vocabulary, proposed species name, etc. If Nature published a statement regarding their refusal to publish her manuscript, I'd hungrily read that too. Unfortunately, after challenging the proponents of the process here on this thread to produce such a statement........or any statement at all........, it is clear that Nature was and remains perfectly silent about the submission. And that's their right. Thus, it is consequently also my right to read Ketchum's manuscript, the peer reviews she posted, her appeal letter to Nature, and consider it as a layman. And I have done so. My opinion is that her claims that sasquatch mDNA being 100% "human" fits other such claims by several sources. Also, her claim that the nDNA is..........different............also fits Sykes opinion, although Margaryan has claimed to show differently, although Sykes death prevented his reply. Thus, it is my opinion that sasquatches are likely of the genus Homo. And that's as far as I need to take it at this point, because that confirms that I want nothing to do with killing one. But I welcome any of you to blast away as the spirit moves you. Quote .........Then Dr. Hart should scrape the train wreck off the wall and write a paper and resubmit it for peer review….. it’s been what? 10 years? Looks like she's still involved with the Muppet/Puppet Show down there in Texas. Maybe she'll get a bleeding chunk of meat and try again. My bet is that if she does, the industry will Trump her even more viciously than before. She'd be better off retiring and taking up fly fishing......... 2 hours ago, norseman said: Anyone want a pair of Melba Ketchum signed earrings?🤔 https://sasquatchthelegend.com/collections/dr-melba-ketchum No, but I'd love a 38" bat signed by Boog Powell.......... Edited June 11, 2023 by Huntster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePhaige Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 2 hours ago, norseman said: People write books all the time. People charge money for books. Yes. People DO NOT charge for biological discoveries however. Science works on testable and repeatable results. Scientists WANT their work peer reviewed because they want their work validated! They do not charge money in this process. And usually the layman cannot read the peer reviewed paper on the discovery because it’s over their head. Instead they read about it in a peer reviewed publisher magazine or a press release about the article in the peer reviewed publisher’s magazine. Fine? Then Dr. Hart should scrape the train wreck off the wall and write a paper and resubmit it for peer review….. it’s been what? 10 years? Most acquire Grant money... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 2 hours ago, norseman said: People DO NOT charge for biological discoveries however. Oh yes they do, there are paywalls to scientific papers all over the web. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 19 minutes ago, hiflier said: Oh yes they do, there are paywalls to scientific papers all over the web. In the peer review process one scientist has to pay another scientist to check his work???🤔 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiflier Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 (edited) Not saying that at all. Ketchum charges to look at her paper, but she's not the only one. Other scientific studies cost money to read as well because funding doesn't always cover the cost of someone's work. Edited June 11, 2023 by hiflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePhaige Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 Will be interesting to see a public record going forward of who pays for the access Imagine much of those would like to remain anonymous... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huntster Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 35 minutes ago, norseman said: In the peer review process one scientist has to pay another scientist to check his work???🤔 They'd have to pay me if I was expected to kill it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norseman Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 18 minutes ago, hiflier said: Not saying that at all. Ketchum charges to look at her paper, but she's not the only one. Other scientific studies cost money to read as well because funding doesn't always cover the cost of someone's work. If I had the smoking gun? The greatest discovery of the century? DNA of a 800 lbs ape man roaming North America? I would shout it from the roof tops and drop the report from airplanes like chieu hoi pamphlets! The fact that she makes people pay? Is a red flag…. This isn’t the mating behaviors of the North American ground shrew. Something some college kid is going to pay for to help with their thesis…… In fact this is all she does! She appeals to the Bigfoot community while distancing herself from the scientific community. And now it’s not just Bigfoot. It’s Dogmen, Mothmen and every cryptid known to man. Let’s focus on one cryptid at a time here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePhaige Posted June 11, 2023 Share Posted June 11, 2023 2 minutes ago, norseman said: If I had the smoking gun? The greatest discovery of the century? DNA of a 800 lbs ape man roaming North America? I would shout it from the roof tops and drop the report from airplanes like chieu hoi pamphlets! The fact that she makes people pay? Is a red flag…. This isn’t the mating behaviors of the North American ground shrew. Something some college kid is going to pay for to help with their thesis…… In fact this is all she does! She appeals to the Bigfoot community while distancing herself from the scientific community. And now it’s not just Bigfoot. It’s Dogmen, Mothmen and every cryptid known to man. Let’s focus on one cryptid at a time here? and you would be canceled just like others and she... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts