Huntster Posted June 7, 2023 Posted June 7, 2023 (edited) 44 minutes ago, larryzed said: Science isnt an ideology its science........... LOL........that's almost signature material. I can see now the depth of your well. Quote .......She has no results and not qualifications........ She had results. They were published. Did you read the peer reviews, especially the first two rounds? Quote .......Shes a veterinarian and a grifter. Not a geneticist. Uhhhm.........we're not talking about a botanist specializing in Africa violets studying this phenomenon. Veterinary science is almost precisely what we need looking into this. And, BTW, there were several labs involved, not just her, and they worked blind.......IOW, they were sent samples without telling them what it was and asking for their analysis. You really don't know what you're posting about, do you? Hmmmmm.......larryzed.........do we know you by another name? Edited June 7, 2023 by Huntster 1 1
hiflier Posted June 7, 2023 Posted June 7, 2023 9 minutes ago, Huntster said: Veterinary science is almost precisely what we need looking into this. ^^ QFT!! 1
Huntster Posted June 7, 2023 Posted June 7, 2023 8 minutes ago, Huntster said: .....Hmmmmm.......larryzed.........do we know you by another name?...... Larryzfoot maybe? Ya' know, after being banned once, you might want to use some creativity when slinking back in. Maybe being banned twice might make you understand what it's like to publish in "respected" science journals. "Folks" might just not want to hear.......or "publish".........your intellectual offerings.......... 1
norseman Posted June 7, 2023 Admin Posted June 7, 2023 Here is a new interesting article. I was not aware she got into hot water in Texas (not Bigfoot related). https://centerforinquiry.org/blog/the-return-of-melba-ketchum/ 1
Huntster Posted June 7, 2023 Posted June 7, 2023 23 minutes ago, norseman said: Here is a new interesting article. I was not aware she got into hot water in Texas (not Bigfoot related). https://centerforinquiry.org/blog/the-return-of-melba-ketchum/ Ben Radford? New? Really?
ThePhaige Posted June 7, 2023 Posted June 7, 2023 Until the SSq and all the other related principalities make their move ( and they are going to) and we then know for sure what the dealio is "in reality", there will be no consensus either on the street corner or within the scientific community. We have always had Ad Hominen attacks and other like tactics to move the focus away from what is actually being looked at... That these tactics exist tells a piece... Now The good doctor didnt do herself any favors going public with her interactions with the SSq and all that goes along with that... I suppose for many the question isnt do SSQ somehow reach out to some of us, but do ya speak about it when they do? Certainly anyone should know that doing so is akin to being soon canceled (or worse) in some circles... I mean the question should be why her... not is she nuts... and when ya resolve that question then it seems clear who is controlling the narrative and thats not comfortable to think about me thinks... 1
norseman Posted June 7, 2023 Admin Posted June 7, 2023 31 minutes ago, Huntster said: Ben Radford? New? Really? April 20th, 23? I learned something new!
Huntster Posted June 7, 2023 Posted June 7, 2023 11 minutes ago, norseman said: April 20th, 23? I learned something new! New in publication date, same-old in message from a dyed-in-wool skeptic.
norseman Posted June 7, 2023 Admin Posted June 7, 2023 8 minutes ago, Huntster said: New in publication date, same-old in message from a dyed-in-wool skeptic. You need to read it.
Huntster Posted June 7, 2023 Posted June 7, 2023 2 minutes ago, norseman said: You need to read it. I did. And it was exactly what I would expect from Radford.
norseman Posted June 7, 2023 Admin Posted June 7, 2023 18 minutes ago, Huntster said: I did. And it was exactly what I would expect from Radford. A complaint was filed against her in Texas over a criminal case in 21. That’s not a matter of opinion by a skeptic.
Huntster Posted June 7, 2023 Posted June 7, 2023 38 minutes ago, norseman said: A complaint was filed against her in Texas over a criminal case in 21. That’s not a matter of opinion by a skeptic. No, but along with Donald Trump, Melba Ketchum, and Jesus Christ, I'm also a heinous criminal.
Madison5716 Posted June 7, 2023 Posted June 7, 2023 On 5/28/2023 at 8:09 PM, ThePhaige said: What exists today is a remnant of a people that HAS TO stay hidden, and has to stay a joke to the masses, and has to be fit into a very specific box (which they don't by the way) which is why under no circumstances can they be determined to be... ya dig Haven't read all the way through yet, but this makes sense to me. During the Miocene Age, there were around 100 species of apes... can you imagine? Thing is, it's never been true in our history that there's been ONE species of ape. Neanderthals, Denisovans, hobbits, Homo Sapiens... makes for fascinating thought when you add in the Sasquatch people as another race/species/ape.
norseman Posted June 7, 2023 Admin Posted June 7, 2023 1 hour ago, Huntster said: No, but along with Donald Trump, Melba Ketchum, and Jesus Christ, I'm also a heinous criminal. She isn’t a criminal. She is incompetent. 1
larryzed Posted June 7, 2023 Posted June 7, 2023 10 hours ago, MIB said: Absolutely correct. If she isn't, if they aren't, NOBODY on earth is. That is why what she did piques my curiosity. If she were not qualified, it wouldn't be interesting, it'd just be meh, more of same. Thats exactly what it was, the rest is wishful thinking. 10 hours ago, Huntster said: LOL........that's almost signature material. I can see now the depth of your well. She had results. They were published. Did you read the peer reviews, especially the first two rounds? Uhhhm.........we're not talking about a botanist specializing in Africa violets studying this phenomenon. Veterinary science is almost precisely what we need looking into this. And, BTW, there were several labs involved, not just her, and they worked blind.......IOW, they were sent samples without telling them what it was and asking for their analysis. You really don't know what you're posting about, do you? Hmmmmm.......larryzed.........do we know you by another name? Believe what you want, she's not qualified and her "results" were amusing at best. 2 1
Recommended Posts