Robert Lindsay: The Ketchum Paper Is Due To Be Published At The End Of February [Bigfoot DNA]
Dr. Melba Ketchum tells us the paper will be published when it's done. No specific date or time frame had ever been released from her camp. Based on information from a source, Lindsay believes the Ketchum Report is on the brink of publication:
We are finally able to give a date for the publication date of the Ketchum DNA paper. According to the Ketchum camp, the paper is due to be published at the end of February. That is one month from now. A news conference will be held at that time. But Ketchum has given publication dates many times before, and all of those have been wrong. But this one is after the paper was already accepted for publication (around December 31), so it’s likely to be more accurate.If that news isn't enough for you, Lindsay has another tidbit: There will be more than one Ketchum DNA paper.
Shazam! So, what do you mean there will be more than one paper Lindsay?
Lindsay:
We have now learned that Ketchum will write not one but at least several DNA papers about this data. This is very interesting news. So the upcoming paper will not be the last word on this data from Ketchum.
On the other hand, I have problems with this to the extent that data about the materials used in the study may be locked down from release to the media for a long time even after the publication of this paper. For instance, after publication of this paper, I would assume that all data about the materials used in the study could be released.
However, if the material is then to be used on new studies, it may be embargoed again under the Ingelfinger Rule. All of the NDA’s, etc. so far have been done for a variety of reasons, but one of the reasons behind Ketchum’s secrecy is the Ingelfinger Rule.
However, the rule frequently allows a certain amount of release of data, so her paranoia doesn’t make much sense under an adherence to that rule. What the reasons are for it then, I am not sure. Anyway, it just prevents mostly her from releasing data to the media, and doesn’t prevent her from releasing data to fellow scientists say at a presentation. For instance, she is not supposed to do media interviews about the study before it is published.
Now, people like me can run pretty much any report we want about an unpublished study, but revealing the study results in detail would be pretty snarky and would almost constitute prior release under Ingelfinger. In the case of the Ketchum study, that would mean if we released actual DNA sequences or technical findings.
[via robertlindsay.wordpress.com]
Anyone ever noticed the complete lack of facts in Lindsay's articles? I mean, go through it thoroughly, not one fact.
ReplyDeleteHe even says that he can "finally give a date" - but doesn't and only gives a rough time period (at the end of next month).
The guys an attention seeking crook. No better than Biscardi IMO.
Absolutely spot on Mark.
ReplyDeleteShaun, UK
My comment on his blog. Hope this is ok to post here Shaun. But its worth letting people know about his credibility - when dealing with any slight criticism.
ReplyDelete----------------------------------
Not really Robert. Where are the FACTS?
Even the worse, two bit dollar, journalist bases there copy on some kind of established fact.
This is just the – be it poorly written – account of a washed-up, attention seeker.
Reply
Robert Lindsay
January 31, 2012 at 1:58 AM
Sorry Markie. You’re banned. Also, like almost every Bigfooter I know, how come you can’t write a coherent sentence?
Mark, I saw your comment on his blog and I agree with you. Lindsay is really going over the deep end- talking a lot of conjecture and gossip. He seems to have it out for Meldrum, and attacks the two people who backed Meldrum up earlier. Of course Lindsay calls these two liars.
ReplyDeleteMakes me laugh that he bans those that criticize him, then hides behind free speech and the rights of journalists as an excuse to say what he wants about anyone.
ReplyDeleteOdious little man.
Also, running a blog doesn't make you a journalist Lindsay, it makes you a blogger.
Shaun, UK
Thanks Shaun. I'm glad you're blog is sticking up for the voices of reason.
ReplyDeleteI agree. This isn't a personal attack on him or his views. I just want to highlight that he hasn't provided any reliable facts and now is banning and attacking people who question him. Put this with his offensive and anti-semitic remarks and your left with something truely disturbing.
TIS IS JUST A HUNCH BUT IF LINDSAY AND OTHERS WOULD STOP PREDICTING THE KETCHUM PUBLISHING DATE THEY MIGHT JUST PUBLISH IT. NONE OF THESE JOURNALS WANT TO BE PUNKED THEY WANT TO BE THE ONES TO CONTROL THEIR PUBLISHING DATES AND IF THEY THINK THEY HAVE A MOLE ON BOARD THEY MAY JUST HOLD OFF UNTIL THE COAST IS CLEAR. PLEASE EVERYONE JUST WAIT NO MORE PREDICTIONS OK. tHINK ABOUT SEX INSTEAD LOL
ReplyDeleteooooo - I'm not that Shawn, I'm Shaun, with a 'U'. He's Shawn with a 'W'.
ReplyDeleteTo tell the difference, I'm in the UK, so sign all my posts with Shaun, UK.
Hope that helps :-)
Couple more ways to tell the difference between "Shaun" and "Shawn."
ReplyDeleteShaun spells his name all funny. Shawn does not.
Shawn is my friend. Shaun is most certainly not.
HTH!
Your a moron! Your definitely the Natl Enquire of Bigfoot Bloggers.....For the life of me I cannot figure out why Shawn wastes his time publishing your articles. You haven't been right about a single thing.
DeleteLindsays been banning since he started his BS blog. I was banned a year and a Hal ago for disagreeing with him. I believe it was that I didn't agree that black people have a predisposition to violence. What really made me laugh was how mad he got when I told him that white was not a race. He thinks all whites are the same tribe.
ReplyDeleteWell put Shaun, apparently Lindsay thinks free speech should be at his discretion.
I'm going to say it again, I think the Shawn who writes this blog and Robert Lindsay might be one in the same. Just a theory, but... John
Ahh, there we go. Shaun, you should run your own blog!
ReplyDeleteShawn, no offence but your helping Robert in his downfall. So keep up the good work.
Robert, seeing that you're keeping your beady eye on events here: Why don't you show some screen grabs of the emails from your "sources"? Names can be blanked out etc.
Rise to the challenge, rather than try to worm your way out of it!
Robert, you're a sad little man. My name is funny? Funny how exactly?
ReplyDeleteSean/Shaun/Shawn is the Irish equivalent of the French 'Jean'. Anglicisation's of the name include Sean (without a fada), Shane, Shayne, Shaine, Shaun, and Shawn. (Source - Wikipedia)
Not being your friend is something I'm very pleased about.
I don't know you, or care to. I know the type of material you write on your blog, and don't like it.
The way you behave is childish, and extremely unprofessional for a so called journalist (writing a blog doesn't make you a journalist).
Real journalists believe in freedom of speech. But, you run your blog like some old fashioned communist dictator and ban anyone who's comments you don't like. Pathetic.
John - I don't think Shawn and Robert are the same person, otherwise we'd all e abnned from here.
Shaun, UK
Shaun: Your name is funny because it's attached to YOU.
ReplyDeleteMarkie Little Boy: A good journalist doesn't reveal his sources.
There's a comments policy on the blog, and you kiddos violated it. You need to practice up on your reading comprehension.
And in case you are wondering, of course there is no hard evidence that BF's use fire or live underground. That's just what one person says. That's all it is.
Do I think they use fire? A few of them might, rarely, maybe in a cave or a place like that. Otherwise no.
Do I think that BF's live underground? No evidence.
HTH!
'Shaun: Your name is funny because it's attached to YOU'
ReplyDeleteRobert, you really need to grow up. I actually feel sorry for you.
Someone or something must have really had a really negative effect on your life. Get some help with it. In fact, if I can help let me know. Makes me sad to see someone act in such a pathetic way. Everyone has some good in them, I'm sure if we try hard enough we can help find yours.
Shaun, UK
Robert, what would you know about "good journalism"? I'm not asking you to reveal your sources.
ReplyDeleteAll I'm aksing you is to show some kind of evidence that you've really been talking to these "sources". So maybe, you haven't been sitting in your bedroom, in your mom's place, dreaming up spurious claims about people who have actually achieved something with their lives.
Stop behaving like an imbecile and act like a man. At least then you won't come across like a victim of High School bullying.
"But Ketchum has given publication dates many times before".......No she hasnt. She absolutely has not! By the way, doesnt Lindsay look a lot like Rick Morano only goofier. Just saying
ReplyDeleteHe looks like he bought those specs in 1988, and they weren't cool then either.
ReplyDeleteShaun, UK
Broski--you're as brassy as I am. Well, if Lindsay said it, I can take that to the bank (and hold up the teller with s fake gun). I think I know one of his informants. It's Stinky Stanopolus, the most unwashed boy in the third grade. He's notorious on the playground where Lindsay finds his sources. I know it's Stinky, because his information reeks.
ReplyDeleteWhen I read Lindsays comments and opinion, I always think of Jon Lovitz voice from the "Brave little toatser',(the radio) the annimated film from the 80's for some reason. Seems like a natural fit.
ReplyDeleteYou should think bigfooters were a patient lot by now, after all it's a subject a long time in the media but it seems everybody's acting like crazies. Just relax, can't you dummies tell it's very close at hand probably. If it's a few more weeks or a few more months, who cares, not long ago we all predicted it'd be many years away. And even if it is that, we do know the species is real, that's de facto declared already. So hold your horses. lol
ReplyDeleteYou must mean moranis, not morano....close...check the pic
ReplyDeletehttp://splitsider.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/02-ghostbusters.jpg
Found the website a few weeks ago, and I have to say this is better than any soap opera or Real People From Wherever. You people all slay me, and the bickering amongst who has the best source, DNA, photo, video, PHD, or whatever is hysterical; but also damning to the general public. What people see are a bunch of petty people calling each other liars, hoaxers, frauds, you name it. No wonder people think anyone who even thinks Bigfoot exists is crazy, and why mainstream academics run away screaming at the mere mention of the creature. Who wants to get dragged into a pissing match between Melba, Meldrum, Moneymaker, Lindsay, Erickson, et al ? Frankly, if the DNA evidence is legitimate, has been verified by accredited institutions, and the paper peer reviewed, then hallelujah, maybe, just maybe, mainstream academia will accept the "possibility" of Sasquatch. If it turns out to be another in a long line of interesting leads that went nowhere, then the paper sets back any potential research even further. What would be refreshing if all of the various egos, bloggers, academics, amateurs could quit their bickering and backstabbing and present a unified front for Bigfoot research. Combine resources, trust each other, trust that it's not about the money (which seems to be a big driver for a lot of the bickering), and freaking work together. End of rant.
ReplyDeleteYou still bothered to rant about it like a good little hypocrite. lol Anyway, who cares one flying f*ck what the general public thinks, they're totally clueless on the subject so how could they know any better than act bewildered. An whatever bigfooters yak about here, fact is the Sasquatch species is a real living species no matter what.
ReplyDeleteLINDSAY FEBRUARY 29TH WHERES THE STUDY...WHY DONT WE SEE IT? BECAUSE ITS A SHAM THATS WHY!!
ReplyDeleteLess than 6 hours until Lindsay looks like a complete fool yet again !!!!
ReplyDeleteI have been reading all the comments concerning the Ketchum paper since they started appearing on this blog. Up to this point I have not commented on anything. I am not a scientist nor do I beleive anyone should comment on this until this has passed peer review and published. However, realizing of course that this is a public blog and everyone has a right to an opinion I do defer to all of you.
ReplyDeleteThere is one thing I would like to make a point on. As a business person I look at all this scuttlebut in one way and only one way. Why would Dr. Ketchum risk her business for the sake of covering up, making excuses, or purposely exposing data prematurely? If her findings are worng, she will ultimately hurt her business and way or earning a living. If she is found to have been a fruad or incomptenet then all of her normal every day business will suffer, I gurantee it. Either Dr. Ketchum is reckless and stupid or she has something in her back pocket that's going to support her study. I'm open minded enough to take a wait and see attitude.