|Dr. Melba Ketchum|
The gossip about Dr. Ketchum's Bigfoot DNA study being submitted to Nature started on Robert Lindsay's blog, and then R.W. Ridley picked it up, and then we reported on what Ridley picked up. Yeah, it's a big mess. But you don't have to worry because it just got cleared up by no one other than Dr. Melba Ketchum herself. Thanks to an anonymous comment, here's the official statement posted on Dr. Melba Ketchum's Facebook page:
Somebody commented on this in a blog as a speculation but it is misinformation. The person with the blog ran with it. We are not announcing any potential journal or publication date until we are allowed to do so by the editors of the publication. I will say that our paper is not with the Nature group. What we are currently doing and where the paper is/is not cannot be discussed. Thank you for the interest though. It will come out when it is supposed to come out. I am sure of that and it shouldn't take that much longer.
- Dr. Melba Ketchum
Here's what R.W. Ridley wrote on his blog about Dr. Ketchum and the Nature Journal rumor on October 14, 2011:
Blogger Robert Lindsay has been cranking out some fascinating posts about Dr. K and her study for some time now. Lindsay is an interesting character. The number of people who revile him is only matched by the number of people who admire him. To put it kindly, he is a lightning rod of controversy. I dare say if you ever read his blog, you will find something that will disgust and anger you. And, that is exactly how Lindsay wants it. In the interest of complete disclosure, I don’t like his views on race or politics, but I can’t help but like him. He’s an open book and there’s something inherently likable about that.
Lindsay has much more faith in his sources than I do. He’s started a number of his posts with “We can now report.” Meaning, he’s confident enough in his sources to share their information as fact. He started his latest blog post on BF, Bigfoot News October 10, 2011, in just such a way. In this particular post, he is making the claim that the science journal Nature has accepted Dr. K’s (and her co-authors) paper for review. Normally, I would pass this off as wishful thinking by Lindsay’s source, but I was contacted on this blog and via private messaging by an individual weeks ago insisting the paper was under peer review by Nature. Is my source the same ndividual? I don’t know, but I do find it interesting that Lindsay, and I both received the same information. I didn’t report on it then, because there was just no way for me to confirm it. I present it to you here as still unconfirmed information.
The second part of the Nature rumor is the second most sensational thing you will read here today. Lindsay is reporting that the editors of the journal called Dr. K in for a meeting with them at their headquarters in London. Separately, an AJ Ciani reported on the BF Forums that Dr. K met with members of a review panel in Europe. Again, how reliable the sources are in this case is unknown. If true, it is an unprecedented move by a scientific journal. They don’t meet with the authors of study as a rule, and this has skeptics dismissing the rumors out of hand. I am of the belief if Dr. K’s study has met all criteria and is credible, they would almost have to meet with her and members of her team before publishing a paper about a topic that is usually relegated to the pages of tabloid magazines. If the paper unquestionably proves the existence of such a creature, they must take every precaution before publication. But that’s just my opinion.