Robert Lindsay reveals source of rumor for Bigfoot DNA Study and Nature Magazine

There has been numerous rumors regarding Dr. Melba Ketchum's Bigfoot DNA study and the Nature journal. One rumor was that the study was being looked at by the science journal Nature and then it was later rejected. Another rumor was that it never made it to Nature. This led many to speculate and ultimately confused those who have been following Dr. Ketchum. Attempts by Dr. Ketchum to clarify this matter is sparse since the study is currently under peer review and she is not allowed to talk about it.

In an article titled "Bigfoot News January 2012," Robert Lindsay writes about how this rumor possibly started:

Melba Ketchum report may be nearing release: On her Facebook page, Ketchum released a statement that implied that publication may not be too far off. It said, “Yes, it will get really exciting before long, LOL!” In her Texas American dialect, using “before long” instead of “soon” means that something is going to happen quite soon indeed.

Ketchum deserves to be supported on this report 100%. She’s going to go down in history as one of the biggest names in this field, for whatever it’s worth.

Max Plank Institute: There is a lot of speculation about the Max Plank Insttitue and whether or not anyone is trying to get a study done there. Apparently they might be interested in a new hominid. I can confirm that there are some lower level people at the institute who are indeed very interested in the question. Is a Stubstad parallel Bigfoot DNA project going on at the Max Plank Institute? No it is not.

Source for the Nature rumors: There is much speculation about whether or not Ketchum’s paper was at Nature magazine for a while. Matt Moneymaker said it was there, but it was “handed back” for a couple of reasons. One reason was “no testable hypothesis.” Another reason was “no zoologist on the paper.” The not having a zoologist is a major failing, but I doubt Ketchum is going to correct that oversight either.

We were the ones who initially started the rumor that the paper was at Nature magazine. Ketchum then said that the paper was not at Nature. She was correct – it had been at Nature, but Nature handed the paper back. Moneymaker confirmed this later on.

So I suppose you are all wondering who our source was for the Nature rumors? The source was ultimately none other than David Paulides, who is about as closely associated with Dr. Ketchum and her project as anyone could be, if you catch my drift. Paulides apparently hates us and orders people not to link to us, and he has written a few articles attacking irresponsible bloggers (us among others apparently) and what not.

Skeptics keep hammering away that we have no evidence that the paper was ever at Nature in the first place. On the looks of the evidence, it appears that it was very much at Nature at least for a while.

Ketchum paper at a new journal. Yes, it is at a new journal, and it looks as if it may be published soon. We do not know the name of the journal, but we may be able to give you a guess soon.

Skeptics and Henry Gee, Nature editor: Gee wrote an article a while back after the discovery of Flores Man suggesting that relict hominids may well exist on the planet. Now that the paper has been handed back, skeptics suggest that the paper must be terminally flawed in some terrible way. The main hypothesis is that the paper shows “human DNA.”

The paper does not show human DNA. How many times do we have to tell you this? The NuDNA is, in terms of polymorphisms, about 1/3 of the way from a human to a chimp. This does not mean that a Bigfoot has chimp genes anymore than a human has chimp genes or a chimp has human genes.

Let us say that chimps share 94% of their genes with man. Then Bigfoot shares 98% of its genes with man. 1/3 of the way from a human to a chimp. Get it? It’s sad that so many people misunderstand this. An animal that shares only 98% of its genes with man cannot possibly be human in the way human is defined on this Earth.

The skeptics also said that Gee would have to be a complete idiot who made the mistake of his lifetime to have turned back a good Ketchum paper with the conclusion of the century. Well then, that must be correct. Gee apparently is a complete idiot then, and he just did make the mistake of his lifetime I suppose. He’s only human; why is that so hard to figure out?

The Snellgrove Lake blood sample. The skeptics are going nuts about this finding. First of all, only MtDNA was tested, and Bigfoot MtDNA is human. Further, only ~300 markers were tested. No unusual markers were found. The cabin is indeed fly in only, with frankly no access period by any other way. It’s about 40 miles from the nearest human settlement, 40 miles of the roughest swamp, bog and forest land you can imagine. No way did a person step on that nail.

Further, mixed in with blood on the nails was hair. So this person had hair on the bottom of his feet? No way. In addition, 17 inch footprints were found nearby, with the classic Bigfoot signature. A barefoot human with 17 inch prints? No. The third point is that many guests had written in the guestbook about Bigfoots bothering them while at the cabin. So an Indian stepped on those nails? Uh uh.

Are Bigfoots part-Erectus? I think they may well be part Erectus. The final result may indeed look something like Heidelbergensis, which was Erectus transitional to archaic Sapiens. Heidelbergensis was huge, often over 7 feet tall, and he had an occipital crest on his heads. They date to 11,000 YBP in China.

Flores Man and Erectus DNA. It is dubious that we will get good DNA from either any time soon. Erectus may have gone out way too long ago and no DNA was extractable from Floresiensis samples. It is dubious that we will find more Floresiensis samples anytime soon. Keep in mind that there is no way to get DNA out of remains older than 47,000 years with present technology.

You can read the full article at robertlindsay.wordpress.com