Someone Not So Smart Just Uploaded Ketchum's Paper to His Website
The owner of a website named Venomdoc just uploaded Dr. Melba Ketchum's Bigfoot DNA paper to www.venomdoc.com. We're not going to provide the link here for obvious legal reasons, but googling "[Censored].pdf" with the quotations will give you the link. The uploader must have forgotten to remove the file from the website because this link appears to be spreading like wildfire as we speak.
[Update] Just go pay the 30 bucks. It's worth the read and Ketchum needs to recoup the money to pay back Wally.
WHY would I want to read garbage???
ReplyDeleteFIRST
And 2nd
Delete6:30: SCEPTARD: DO NOT RESUSCITATE
DeleteObvious Mulder is obvious ^^
DeleteObvious sceptard ^^
DeleteLooks like Shawn did provide the link!
DeleteShows how trolls think. Why read anything when I can just trash it and think I am funny.
Delete"Why would i want to read that garbage"
DeleteSays a guy that is on BIGFOOT site so often he gets the "FIRST" comment. What a douche.
Why read it when you're completely unqualified to judge its merit, or lack thereof?
Delete"Why would i want to read that garbage"
DeleteSays a guy that is on BIGFOOT site so often he gets the "FIRST" comment. What a douche.
DeleteIt's on there but none of the supplements are included.
rush
ReplyDeleteby mere seconds, damn.
DeleteFirst to note that bigfoot is fake.
ReplyDelete^^^ SCEPTARD: DO NOT RESUSCITATE
DeleteWas mindraped by 5 bigfoot on his 18th bday^^^
DeleteAlso doesn't know how to spell skeptard.
DeleteHello folks,
ReplyDeleteMay I present a new garment from Sceptard Outfitters?
This is our new T-shirt, available in sizes XS to XXXL in an array of colours.
Imprinted on the front and back of this new garment, in glittering tinfoil-like lettering, is this eye-catching phrase:
SCEPTARD: DO NOT RESUSCITATE
Get one now for yourself or a loved sceptard! Why not save and get two, one for you and one
for you favourite sceptard?
Ta ta, and happy shopping!
The Gang at Sceptard Outfitters!
Ta Ta? Are you British?
DeleteAre you the exiled Kerchak?
GOTCHA!!
Look buddy, this is my space. I'm trying to sell some monkeys here! Hurry up guys, these monkeys are going like hot cakes. The response has been overwhelming and I only have a few left! Call (914) 794-2183 and ask for Jonathan.
DeleteGet it before it's gone!
ReplyDeleteMulder is our leader.
ReplyDeleteActually, masterbarber is your leader.
DeleteHe's also a real dick.
Mulder is living in his moms basement. He might have a bike, and a safety helmet. But he's the man on a bigfoot forum. Guys listen up! Our leader is here!!!
DeleteDude probably has never owned a car.
LOL. A guy who believes that made-up stories about monsters in the woods is comparing people to retards.
ReplyDelete^^LMFAO!
DeleteFirst to leave a skidmark in black underwear.
ReplyDeleteI call hoax!!
ReplyDeleteHEY. READ THIS. Ok, you read that, right? Good, now I'm pretty sure you're still reading, so I'll make my point. I think there is some legitimacy to this whole Bigfoot thing, in some form. However, sifting through the detritus to find something that holds weight has obviously been difficult for many people. I have an idea for those of us that actually want to discuss this topic in a mature, productive fashion.
ReplyDeleteIgnore the repeated posts by skeptics and trolls. Don't respond, don't engage. Post around their drivel, and let's see if we can maintain some consistent discussions that will actually benefit the portion of this community that shares this same view.
Don't be bring me into your bigfeet juju. I dindoo nuffins.
DeleteThe only reason I cum here is to read the posts from the skeptics and the trolls.
Delete^ because your the moron posting them. Stop pretending to be others?
DeleteSorry but degenerate bleebers getting on here posting and subsequently circle jerking to looney tooned drivel doesn't equate to "productivity". Well, I guess it does when you live in a fantasy world that is filled with thousands of 8' tall 800 lb. monkey men running around north aamerica.
DeleteGot monkey? Didn't think so.
Shut Up^ you post on here thousands of times a week moron!
Delete^^^^ Sniffs imaginary monkey butts.
Delete^ smells his own butt!
DeleteAnon 7:25 Got a job? Didn't think so!
DeleteMany of these skeptards are indeed employed to comment their garbage here freely, the anti bf army is ordered to do and not ask any questions but act the good obedient soldier. The mission is called Smearing Melba.
DeleteLets see one one side we have Dr. Ketchums DNA paper. and on the other side is Rick Dyers Dead Bigfoot.. Take your pick.
ReplyDeleteHmmmmm...
DeleteHmm one side we have your Douchebag Mother and On the other side your douchbag Grandma. Why don't you pick....Prick.
Deletehttp://sasquatchgenomeproject.org/
ReplyDeletehttps://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.venomdoc.com%2Fdownloads%2FNovel_North_American_Hominins.pdf
ReplyDeleteDamn glad I didn't drop 30 bucks on the paper. The free download wasn't even worth the time.
ReplyDeleteNow us skeptics can read the garbage first hand and really have a good laugh.
This just gets better and better. Have to laugh at anyone that would of paid money for it, when we have the woundedful www where everything gets leaked over time... Suckers...
^ Liar troll locked in denial of Bigfoot.
DeleteReads as if written by a retarded twelve year old.
ReplyDeleteNo it doesn't, you just read like one.
DeleteIt wasnt hard to understand
She explains it well, I'm convinced she is on to something. The medulla!
^^^° Something is definitely wrong with your medulla onlongata then.
DeleteYour smear can't kill the reality of the DNA my dear denier.
DeleteMelba does not like to give things away for free, she is going to be pissed. I can see her stomping up and down right now.
ReplyDeleteIs she wearing a nightgown or just panties?
DeleteDouche!
ReplyDeleteOuch! Melba's gonna be pissed she lost out on 60 bucks.
ReplyDeleteHa!
DeleteMake that 60 bucks.
DeleteAnd what the fuck is a Hominin?
Its a sophisticated electronic musical instrument. The Beach Boys used one to great effect on "Good Vibrations". Wait, that was a theremin..sorry. A tiny hooker? Ho-mini-n...
DeleteMake that 90 bucks now. The sites almost crashing with all the free downloads. Melba must be having a fit.
Delete120.
DeleteI have it printed out and saved on Adobe.
ReplyDeleteI'll give you 29 bucks for it. Score!
DeleteThats Melba getting revenge all you guys just downloaded a virus and your computers are going to crash
ReplyDeleteLOL
DeleteI'm uploading it to every file sharing site I can find. Hahaha
ReplyDeleteIt's as virus you fucking tool.
DeleteThere's more science on a bottle of Flintstone's Vitamins than in that report.
ReplyDeleteHahahaha...
Delete^^^ SKEPTARDS: DO NOT RESUSCITATE
Delete^^^ Believes in magic forest people fairy tales yet insinuates that doubters are retarded.
Delete^ Believes in what his government tells him the good gullible sheep.
DeleteA few obvious flaws in the study:
ReplyDeleteAt lines 217-227, Ketchum fails to identify the lab that the searchers were using, saying only that it "routinely extracted DNA from animal hair and hair root tags."
At lines 288-302, Ketchum claims that the mtDNA haplotypes are European and African in origin. She then tries to explain this away by suggesting the Americas were originally colonized by Europeans. There is no evidence for this claim. At no time does she admit that this could indicate the samples were contaminated, hoaxed, or not from sasquatch.
Shortly thereafter, she admits that she rolled her own primers. See lines 362 et seq.
Talk is cheap, science boy. Prove it.
DeleteLet us know when you get to the important stuff; Why was Sally fired???
DeleteMore flaws:
DeleteKetchum discusses NYU's tests on Zana and Khwit, but does not acknowledge the results showed them to be modern humans, not some sort of hybrid. Line 609 et seq.
In the next paragraph, she cites Monster Quest. Other footnotes include "Aiello, L and Dean, C.
An Introduction to Human Evolutionary Anatomy. Academic, New York, (1998)." See n.33.
Cant say i believe in bigfoot, but didnt they find pre-clovis arrow/spear heads on the east cost that are credited to euro's crossing atlantic?
DeleteCant say i believe in bigfoot, but didnt they find pre-clovis arrow/spear heads on the east cost that are credited to euro's crossing atlantic?
DeleteMore Flaws? You don't know what the hell your talking about you tard! Stop wasting our time with your uneducated opinions . Blah blah blah !
Delete8:44 You are a dick. You're trying to silence someone because they are not saying what you want to hear. Point out his or hers mistakes or point out things Ketchum is correct about or go back to asking your nanny to make you a sandwich. Grow up,jerkoff.
Delete@8:33/8:38. There have been a few anomalous artifacts, but that could be a result of any number of things - mistakes in dating or someone salting a site, for instance. DNA evidence and the vast majority of the archaeological evidence suggest there was no European migration to the Americas until the Vikings, and no permanent migration until Columbus. Simply put, Ketchum is latching onto a fringe theory based on cherry-picked data to support her claims.
Delete^ Latching on to a fringe theory to support a claim based on contaminated samples submitted by youtube clowns and known hoaxers. LMAO.
Delete^ First class loser.
DeleteOkay, I usually don't do this, but I'm feeling crazy today! If you call me in the next five minutes and buy a monkey from me, I will include one free outfit for your monkey! I got tuxedos, tutus, overalls, cowboy shirt and jeans, jogging suits, and even a full civil war uniform! Plus many more! Call Jonathan "Monkeyman" @ (914) 794-2183.
ReplyDeleteGot any baby bigfoots for sale? I need to form my own army to take over DNA.diagnostics center.
DeleteExcellent paper with solid science. There can be no doubt now - sasquatch exists!
ReplyDeleteAs a geneticist, I would have to disagree with your statement. I see many mistakes with her work and with the journals work too.
DeleteThis paper looks like a someone who has had little time in this field, had written it in a hurry. It is a very poor excuse for a so science paper. It assume way to much, no wonder it didn't pass peer review. This woman Melba Ketchum should avoid the TV show "Are you smarter than a Fifth grader?" because she clearly is not.
Okay - please provide the details - debate the issue - you're just resorting to insults like all the other anonymous posters on this website.
DeleteYou're right Achim, but remember this blog has one purpose and one purpose only; a sole intend of trashing this study once it came out. We all knew that, there's no real interest in Sasquatches instead here they're hiding behind a flimsy Giganto excuse they know isn't this species only to uphold the chance of continuing an impossible fantasy. It's only weak attempts at discrediting researchers and witnesses, old government tactics going back to Roswell.
Delete@12:12--As a "geneticist" you must have attended college. Did all your papers contain as many grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors as your post does? I doubt very much you are any kind of scientist, let alone a college graduate.
Deletesweet tweet; it'll only speed up the "metilda video" to be fed out if it even exists ;PS
ReplyDeleteReading Ketchum's study, I so far don't see the misspellings and errors claimed by the skeptards (who probably/certainly didn't read it). I see two missing hyphens so far, to be absolutely perfectly correct and accurate per US English usage.
ReplyDeleteYou can't trust a skeptard as far as you could throw one.
That is hilarious, the paper does not prove shit, but the grammar is good. Keep reading Ketchtard
DeleteShut up BE retard tool, your lack of understanding how science works is riviting fun.
DeleteDo you JREF butt plugs still bleeve Kitakaze found the P/G suit and Parnassus is everything but an astronaut?
ReplyDelete"we won't post the link for obvious legal reasons, but here's how you can google it. enjoy the free pdf!"
ReplyDeleteThis paper is laughably written. I swear a middle school aged kid could write a more scientific paper. I mean the Epic of Gilgamesh and Daniel Boone?
ReplyDelete8:22 are you saying you read the paper or had the paper read to you?
Delete8:22 are you saying you read the paper or had the paper read to you?
DeleteAnon 8:22 never read the paper. Liar!
DeleteWe don't want anyone to read it. Ever. We must silence anyone who dares comment on it. We must maintain the illusion it is real science and not a steaming pile of shit! That is how academia works, you see.
DeleteTrolls will be trolls.
DeleteCan't wait for the next post, this one has too many nerds commenting.
ReplyDeleteWhats the big deal? I'm sure she passed out copies at the weekly seminar she spoke at. Certainly, she wants people to read and discuss it....
ReplyDeleteScratch that. I forgot: Any similarities between the Ketchum project and a genuine academic activity is purely coincidental. Is the paper even a Latex generated document? I bet it was created by Wordpad. LOL.
The JREF footers are going bonkers over this DNA stuff. They're prepared to storm Dr. Sykes office with torches if he claims to find Bigfoot DNA.
ReplyDeleteThere are no North American samples in his study- the yeti will be the focus(imo, of course). It would be amazing if a sample with solid provenance from the Himalayas yielded primate dna. THAT would get attention from the media and the scientific community. Obviously, the debate over bigfoots would be affected and naysayers(not genuine skeptics) would be pushed back on their heels.
DeleteOn November 24, 2012, Dr. Melba Ketchum, a Texas veterinarian-turned-animal geneticist, released a statement to the press claiming that her 5 year DNA study had proven the existence of the legendary Bigfoot (a.k.a. Sasquatch). [1] According to the press release, “The genome sequencing shows that Sasquatch mtDNA is identical to modern Homo sapiens, but Sasquatch nuDNA is a novel, unknown hominin related to Homo sapiens and other primate species.” [2] Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is housed in the energy-producing Mitochondrian organelles of a cell’s cytoplasm, and it is only passed matrilineally from mother to daughter. [3] Nuclear DNA is housed in the nucleus of a cell, and it is passed on by both the mother and the father. [4] Therefore, Ketchum believes the “North American Sasquatch is a hybrid species, the result of males of an unknown hominin species crossing with female Homo sapiens” some 15,000 years ago. [5]
ReplyDeleteI first read about this on an NBC News Science Blog article entitled “Meet your Uncle Bigfoot: DNA report claims beast part human.” My blog entry “Bigfoot is my cousin, not my uncle” discussed negative comments left in the comments section of the article decrying the author Benjamin Radford’s skeptical treatment of the subject. Since then, I’ve been updating my blog with information about the questionable origins of the hair and skin samples used in the study, reports of possible rejections of the paper from science journals, and possible ulterior motives for self-promoting the study, such as Ketchum needing money to pay off debts due to her failing genetics business. Apart from doing a coast-to-coast AM radio interview in late December, Ketchum remained quiet about the details of the peer-review process. She was so silent that I figured her mouth had written a check her study couldn’t cash. Then, a few days ago on February 12, 2013, Ketchum posted “BUCKLE UP!!!!” on her Facebook page.[6] I predicted on my aforementioned blog post that three things would probably happen: 1) nothing; 2) she would publish her study in a third rate popular science magazine with very loose submission standards and no connection to any respected scientific organization; or 3) she would publish it online, most likely on a blog. I chose number 3 for being the most likely since there were no previous reports of her paper passing peer-review. It turns out I wasn’t too far off the mark.
Reports from various sources started pouring in on the evening of February 12 that her paper would be published in the Denovo Scientific Journal. [7] You may ask how my prediction was right if it is a science journal. Well, it's not. I did a quick Google search and couldn't find a single website mentioning it. That's extremely strange since the names of respected journals are usually on the first page of results. I couldn’t even find it in my university’s expansive journal database. It seemed like the journal had just popped into existence recently. Then, later on the 12th, Nadia Moore, a biotech researcher with an interest in Bigfoot, used a domain tracker to discover the following information: [8]
DeleteQuote:
Registered through: GoDaddy.com, LLC (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: DENOVOJOURNAL.COM
Created on: 04-Feb-13
Expires on: 04-Feb-14
Last Updated on: 04-Feb-13
[...]
This means the journal had only been created a little over a week prior to the announcement of Ketchum’s paper being published. This gave the impression that she had essentially created her own journal to self-publish her study. Many people were rightly outraged that she would do such a thing. However, on the morning of the 13th, Ketchum released a long statement on her Facebook page claiming that she had “encountered the worst scientific bias in the peer review process.” [9] She terms the situation the “Galileo effect,” basically likening herself to way the famous physicist and astronomer of that name was chastised by the scientific establishment for proposing a theory that contradicted the commonly held belief of the time (Eric Berger of the Houston Chronicle Blog humorously points out this appeal to Galileo “rates a hefty 40 points on the physicists’ crackpot index.”) [10] Most importantly, Ketchum claims her paper actually passed the review of a journal she later purchased and renamed:
Quote:
Delete”We did finally pass peer review with a relatively new journal. It took a fresh outlook on the part of the editors and their careful selection of reviewers with knowledge of next generation whole genome sequencing in order to pass. I have no idea who the reviewers were though I have the reviews. That was kept confidential as is the way journals handle peer reviews. That was only part of the delay and problems associated with publication though. After this journal agreed to publish the manuscript, their legal counsel advised them not to publish a manuscript on such a controversial subject as it would destroy the editors’ reputations (as it has already done to mine). I have documentation on all of this drama. So, rather than spend another five years just trying to find a journal to publish and hoping that decent, open minded reviewers would be chosen, we acquired the rights to this journal and renamed it so we would not lose the passing peer reviews that are expected by the public and the scientific community. Denovo, the new journal is aimed at offering not only more choices and better service to scientists wanting to submit a manuscript, but also reviewers and editors that will be fair, unlike the treatment we have received. We furthermore have adhered to all of the standards set here in the link below, especially since the entire review and agreement to publish was done at the previous journal:
http://publicationethics.org/case/ed...r-own-journal” [11]
Ketchum cites the above webpage as a precedent for why it was ethical for her to publish in her own journal. It's basically a dialogue between a person in the same situation and a representative of the Committee on Publication Ethics. The person claims the focus of the unnamed journal is so specialized that there is only a small handful of people that can peer-review the article. The rep tells them the only ethical way to go about doing that would be to divorce themself from the process. It is recommended that an associate editor send the article out for peer-review and a commentary describing the transparency of the process should be published along with the article if it passes muster. So, the initial situation may mirror that of Ketchum, but the person is clear in the beginning that their journal is well established with a history of publication and a listing in the MEDLINE archive. The journal she bought just popped into existence and has zero publications. The person has problems with peer-review because the subject is so specialized. However, Ketchum's paper deals with animal and human DNA. I'm sure there are numerous qualified veterinarians, biologists, or geneticists who could have peer-reviewed the material, so she can't pull the "obscurity card." She has also failed to provide information detailing who she handed the peer-review process off to, and there doesn't seem to be any transparency commentary to go along with her paper. Thus, the webpage doesn’t even come close to supporting her case, and to my mind, it actually makes her look worse.
Many people have continued to report on blogs and news articles that she published in her own journal because her study failed peer-review. This has apparently gotten on the nerves of one of Ketchum’s supporters, Chuck Prahl, the operator of the Bigfoot Buzz Blog. In this blog entry, Prahl is adamant that her study passed the review of a preexisting journal that was later advised by their lawyer not to publish it (as mentioned above). He provides proof that Ketchum actually acquired the rights of the journal via a screenshot from Zoobank, an open access website for registering current and newly discovered species. The image shows the Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Exploration in Zoology was registered by Ketchum on January 9, 2013, several weeks before it was supposedly renamed to Denovo Scientific Journal. This seems like a pretty open and shut case, but there are several problems.
DeleteFirst, Ketchum registered the name of her article and her chosen scientific trinomial name for Bigfoot, Homo sapiens cognatus, on November 18, 2012, [12] well before she supposedly sent her paper off for peer-review. Second, anyone can apparently just make up the name of a journal when they decide to register a new article (screenshot). To show how easy it is to create an account and register any articles, I’ve taken the liberty of registering an article entitled “The Nocturnal Activities of Drunken Badgers (Taxidea ebrius).” It appears in the prestigious Journal of Imaginary Zoological Studies. The species name Taxidea ebrius literally means "Drunken Badger," and you will be happy to know their range is "mostly wherever there is alcohol." I don't normally do stuff like this—my apologies to Zoobank—but I wanted to make a point. Someone who is willing to register a new species even before their paper has passed peer-review would probably not have any problem with creating the name of a journal out of thin air. The Zoobank entries for both of my mock journal and species have since then been taken down, so here are some screenshots:
Third, the Zoobank page for Ketchum's paper says it was published on Scholastica. This is another open source website where you can create your own journal, describe its purpose, list your editorial board, etc. You also list contact information if people are interested in sending you stuff. Again, to show how easy it is to do this, I took the liberty of creating an actual journal page for the Journal of Imaginary Zoological Studies. The webpage is private (https), but here is a screen shot:
Delete(Click here for a larger picture.)
Fourth, people who create Scholastica journals can post calls for publications on WikiCFP. You can set deadlines for paper registration, submission, notification, and the final version. The WikiCFP page for the Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Exploration in Zoology has no dates accept for the final version, January 11, 2013. In fact, the submission deadline is "TBD" (to be determined). That seems fishy because people can't submit papers if they don't have due dates to go off of. The Scholastica journal is associated with an email account for a person named Casey Mullins. However, as I pointed out above, Ketchum registered the journal on Zoobank two days prior on January 9, 2013. Most importantly, I tried to reach Casey via their listed email (mullins_casey@ymail.com), but the email was returned with the following message: “This user doesn't have a ymail account." (screenshot) This leaves two possibilities, neither of which make Ketchum look good: 1) She happened upon a randomly created journal on the internet (that anyone can make) with zero publication history, submitted her paper to some random person with unknown credentials for review, and later purchased the freely created journal from the previous owner, or 2) she registered the journal on Zoobank (as the evidence shows), created the physical journal herself on Scholastica with fake information, and then later claimed she "purchased" it.
So here is a possible timeline:
DeleteShe registers on Zoobank on October 25, 2012. [13]
She registers the name of her article and the Bigfoot species name on November 18, 2012.
She registers the Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Exploration in Zoology on Zoobank on January 9, 2013.
She creates an online page for the journal on Scholastica on January 11, 2013.
She anonymously registers a webpage for her Denovo Scientific Journal on godaddy.com on February 4, 2013.
She publishes her paper on Denovo Scientific Journal and claims she "purchased" the original journal and renamed it on February 13, 2013.
If this is true, Ketchum clearly intended to cover her tracks by creating the first journal so she could say she later purchased it and renamed it. I would be willing to retract any of the statements I made above if she is willing to provide the documents that she claims to have proving the purchase of the journal actually took place.
The paper has been widely panned by scientists. For the best analysis, see John Timmer's article "Bigfoot genome paper “conclusively proves” that Sasquatch is real" over at Ars Technica.
________________________________________
Update 2-20-13: Scholastica journals are private (https), so I was originally unable to see the first entry for the Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Exploration in Zoology. However, I used Google cache to find a snapshot of it. The date for the first entry is January 4, 2013, which sets the date back a week. I still stand by what I wrote about Ketchum creating the journal with fake information (unless she can prove Casey Mullins is a real person and was the original owner). So the amended possible timeline is:
She registers on Zoobank on October 25, 2012.
She registers the name of her article and the Bigfoot species name on November 18, 2012.
She creates an online page for the Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Exploration in Zoology on Scholastica on January 4, 2013.
She registers the journal on Zoobank on January 9, 2013.
She anonymously registers a webpage for her Denovo Scientific Journal on godaddy.com on February 4, 2013.
She publishes her paper on Denovo Scientific Journal and claims she "purchased" the original journal and renamed it on February 13, 2013.
Here is a screenshot since I think the page has been taken down. Hmm...how convenient.
Update 2-20-13 #2:
DeleteSmokey at the Over The Line, Smokey! Blog has been closely following the developments of this fiasco much longer than I have. His frequently updated article "Texas DNA specialist writes that Sasquatch is a modern human being. UPDATED 2/20/2013. That was 2010; now she says it’s a hybrid" is a must read for a deeper understanding of the situation. He recently contacted me because he was interested in expanding the timeline that I had created with another piece of evidence. Smokey has independently come to the same conclusions about Casey Mullins, their nonexistent email, and their call for papers on WikiCFP. It turns out there was one piece of the puzzle that I had missed. A person with the user name "Mullins casey" (Casey Mullins) submitted a request to Wikipedia to create an article for the Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Exploration in Zoology on January 5, 2013, the day after the journal was first established on Scholastica. [15] Here is a screenshot just in case the cache page goes down:
(Click here for a larger picture.)
This may not seem like a big thing, but it helps establish a recognizable pattern, one involving "jumping the gun." It first starts on November 18, 2012 when Ketchum registers the name of her paper and the trinomial species name for Bigfoot on Zoobank even before her manuscript had been submitted for peer-review. Then, the day after the Journal is created on Scholastica, Casey Mullins tries to create a Wikipedia article for it on January 5, 2013. Finally, Ketchum registers the journal on Zoobank on January 9. If her story is to be believed, she contacted Mullins, sent him her paper, it went through several rounds of peer-review, he agreed to publish it but reneged at the last moment, and Ketchum decided to purchase the journal so she could publish her paper. All of this supposedly happened in 5 days. That’s pretty fast don’t you think? The peer-review of the Plos ONE science journal, for instance, takes on average about a month given that there aren’t any problems. [16] That means either the newly established journal had a much larger pool of scholars to review papers in a much, much, much shorter time than well-established journals, or the story isn’t true. Again, the only other alternative is that Ketchum created her own journal to bypass peer-review. So here is the amended possible timeline:
She registers on Zoobank on October 25, 2012.
DeleteShe registers the name of her article and the Bigfoot species name on November 18, 2012.
She creates an online page for the Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Exploration in Zoology on Scholastica on January 4, 2013.
She tries to create a Wikipedia article on the journal on January 5, 2013.
She registers the journal on Zoobank on January 9, 2013.
She anonymously registers a webpage for her Denovo Scientific Journal on godaddy.com on February 4, 2013.
She publishes her paper on Denovo Scientific Journal and claims she "purchased" the original journal and renamed it on February 13, 2013.
________________________________________
Notes
[1] “'Bigfoot' Dna Sequenced in Upcoming Genetics Study [press Release],” PRWeb, http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/11/prweb10166775.htm (accessed February 18, 2013).
[2] Ibid.
[3] Clark Spencer Larsen, Our Origins: Discovering Physical Anthropology (New York: W. W. Norton & Co, 2011), 59-60.
[4] Ibid, 58. See also the rest of the chapter as it explains how DNA from both parents makes up an individual’s chromosomes.
[5] “'Bigfoot' Dna Sequenced in Upcoming Genetics Study [press Release].”
[6] The post seems to have since then been deleted. But see this blog entry for confirmation.
[7] See for instance, “Breaking: Ketchum Bigfoot Dna Paper Previewed in Denovo Scientific Journal, Embargoed Til 2/13 (updated,” Bigfoot Evidence Blog, http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2013/02/breaking-ketchum-bigfoot-dna-paper.html (accessed February 18, 2013).
[8] She reported this on the blog entry for note #7. See her comment here.
[9] Eric Berger, “Like Omg! Bigfoot Dna Paper Is Published!” Houston Chronicle Blog, http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2013/02/like-omg-bigfoot-dna-paper-is-published/ (accessed February 18, 2013).
[10] See note #11.
[11] “Dr. Melba Ketchum,” Facebook, http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=337317819719558&id=35 9075637446173 (accessed February 18, 2013).
[12] See here for the article title and here for the species. Run your cursor over the orange LSID tag to see the dates.
[13] See her member registration page here. As for the others, run your cursor over the orange LSID tag to see the date.
[14] See note #13.
[15] You can see the submission page here (pay close attention to the date near the bottom). If that goes down for whatever reason, please see these two screenshots that Smokey sent me (here) and (here).
[16] Rebecca Walton, “Ask Everyone: Length of the Review Process,” EveryONE Plos ONE Community Blog, http://blogs.plos.org/everyone/2009/07/14/ask-everyone-length-of-the-review-process/ (accessed February 20, 2013).
Bibliography
DeleteBerger, Eric. “Like Omg! Bigfoot Dna Paper Is Published!” Houston Chronicle Blog. http://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2013/02/like-omg-bigfoot-dna-paper-is-published/ (accessed February 18, 2013).
“'Bigfoot' Dna Sequenced in Upcoming Genetics Study [press Release].” PRWeb. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/11/prweb10166775.htm" (accessed February 18, 2013).
“Breaking: Ketchum Bigfoot Dna Paper Previewed in Denovo Scientific Journal, Embargoed Til 2/13 (updated.” Bigfoot Evidence Blog. http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.com/2013/02/breaking-ketchum-bigfoot-dna-paper.html (accessed February 18, 2013).
“Dr. Melba Ketchum.” Facebook. http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=337317819719558&id=35 9075637446173 (accessed February 18, 2013).
Larsen, Clark Spencer. Our Origins: Discovering Physical Anthropology. New York: W. W. Norton & Co, 2011.
Walton, Rebecca. “Ask Everyone: Length of the Review Process.” EveryONE Plos ONE Community Blog. http://blogs.plos.org/everyone/2009/07/14/ask-everyone-length-of-the-review-process/ (accessed February 20, 2013)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
DeleteThere it is guys. Go to the following link if you want to see the screen shots to the above article written on this Ketchum FAILURE. This guy absolutely UNCOVERS the truth!!!
http://www.historum.com/blogs/ghostexorcist/1380-melba-ketchum-s-bigfoot-dna-study-questionable-ethics-creating-journal.html
What I want to know is, are you one of those paid scoftics from James Randi, that works in a sweatshop of computer screens in Florida, where all you do, all day, is attack people who have done some good work towards educating the masses about mysterious subject matters? Inquiring minds want to know.
DeleteAnon 909. Who cares? I want to know if the data holds up. Not about fake journal. Can't fake DNA. Don't care if she has three fake journals or squatches braiding her hair or squatches running her journal. If the data is good then thats it.
DeleteCould not agree more - well said. It appears there are those more interested in conspiracy theories than if the science is good. I guess if the science is over their heads they only have irrelevant stuff to bring up.
Delete
DeleteThe crux seems to be in the single strand nuDNA this being blamed on contamination and yet the labs used for the work are adament that exhaustive measures were taken in purification, the Q30 scores for the full genomes exceeded the standard expected for confident results if there is an error then this needs to be explained hopefully by one of the scienitsts looking at the paper now.
As I've always said, the best proof for the reality of Sasquatch is the endless attacking this study endures and the sickly pretend interest of skeptards whose spam only prove she's a danger to their covering up ways. Dr. Ketchum has finally proven this species real and wholly expected like dancing mice the haters flock to mock, thanx suckers for helping to prove the Sasquatches a real hominin species by your daily support!
DeleteWhy are there so many morons posting on this site. This paper is a normal well written scientific paper. It's validity is beyond the morons posting here. The paper lists all basis of methods, tests, etc. It will be up to other scientists to determine if the methods and results are valid. It was worth the money.
ReplyDelete^^^^ Chuck Prahl......
DeleteYou are the moron for paying for it: a) If you are an expert, you should have no problem getting a free copy. b) If you are a layman, you wait for experts to explain it and then study and inform yourself about relevant topics pointed out by said experts. By then, it should be all over the web for free! Oh look! Here it is! LOL
DeleteNot only morons - thieves
Delete^^^ Ketchtard who doesn't grasp the fact that Sketchum stole hundreds of thousands and is a pathological liar.
DeleteReal people, not retarded trolls with anti bf agendas, know this has now been solved and dna proven a real living unknown humanlike species of primates. Welcome to the block, guys.
DeleteFirst
ReplyDeleteOh damn, guess I was a little late
Ketchum Is
ReplyDeleteBullshit.
That's because bigfoot is
Deletebullshit.
You are yes.
Deleteso when will the first lawsuit be filed? she has committed fraud.
ReplyDeleteHer dishonest behavior at least merits a complaint with Texas State Board of Veterinary Examiners.
DeleteYou do not know what you are talking about. Terrible
DeleteMelba publicly lied as to the origin of the journal in an attempt to mislead people into believing that the paper was peer reviewed. This constitutes a violation of the Texas Rules Pertaining to the Practice of Veterinary Medicine and is grounds for disciplinary action, including, but not limited to, revocation of license.
DeleteShe didn't publish this paper as a Veterinary Medicine. So please explain how she has violated
DeletePractice of Veterinary Medicine
She hasn't of course but she's about to sue the asses off a few of the creeps trolling here.
DeleteI would sincerely love to know how many Melba haters actually have a university education. I've actually read the DNA study - if you haven't read it - if you haven't done background research reading on DNA testing - and you're hating it in an uninformed matter - you're a goof.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to know how many educated schmucks actually think this self promoted scam of a paper amounts to "anything" in the grand scheme?
DeleteShe didn't pass peer review. She bought her own journal, it wasn't refereed by peers and it means ZERO. Real scientists have already spoken. Its shit.
Whomever you are........you wasted your money getting edgamucated.
Like i said - goof.
DeleteActually, many of us have done post graduate work. That is how we knew this was going to be bullshit. The exercise smacked of commerce from the git-go, and did not come across as a legit academic endeavor. It was a laugh and a circus.
DeleteNow, those of us whose training is not in bio-chem will wait for experts to weigh in, if any bother to read it....
Wow. Complete bullshit. I have training in genetics. See that was easy to make something up like you did
Delete"we knew this was going to be bullshit." So you and your graduate work friends used your psychic mind powers to determine the science was wrong before the study was published and before you and your psychic friends read it? Just want to get this right before we continue.
DeleteThe "graduate" and friends demonstrate through their posts that they have zero critical thinking capability. The validity of the paper will be based on the validity of their science, and will not be based on perceived circus', fraudulent journals or commercialism or any the other irrelevant issues listed. If the science is bad, there will be many willing to expose it.
DeleteOh, excuse me: "We were almost certain it was going to be bullshit". Is that better? If not, 1) Try to find a respected journal that publishes articles 50 pages long 2) re-read all the lies about the peer-review process and embargos.lol 3) Find a paper where a species was named using dna alone 4) Give me a reason to think Ketchum's first paper was going to be a major article in a peer reviewed journal. She doesn't work in a university, lecture or have any history of scholarship.
DeleteCome on, man. She's using her degree and training in genetics to take advantage of people. And I am not even taking into account that condescending bullshit about the stick structures and other silly claims. Whatever. If the experts say she found something good, I will admit I was wrong. Simple. Take care.
10:19 Jeff Meldrum, Rich Stubstad, Nadia Moore, Mike Merchant, Matt Moneymaker etc continued their formal educations after their bachelors. Why is it hard to believe footers and crypto enthusiasts without recognizable names did likewise? I also think there are quite a few who educated themselves to the the equivalent of a masters.
DeleteNow I'm just some anonymous guy on the internet so its probably wise to assume I am full of shit! No problem. Peace.
^ "Now"="On the other hand"...Anyway, have a good one.
DeleteApproval is coming from the top geneticists in the world.
DeleteIt's very simple - we know the dna data is solid thus the study is solid thus anyone saying differently like the lying smear campaign on BE are wrong. People with brains know it and this clowning blog know it better than most because they're writing it all themselves.
Deletethanks shawn,, i snaged it.. not that i know what to do with it...
ReplyDeleteOh my god, she lists Ryan Smith as a writer! Ha, ha!
ReplyDeleteThe dude is a hockey player for the Oilers! Can she get any more foolisher!
^ Known town fool.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDave realized it was Thursday (he's on the East Coast) so he'll repost his comment next Wednesday.
Deletets down now.pity
ReplyDeletenot if you look for the cache version. Once it's out there, it's out there. many search engines have a crawler that caches documents, pics, blogs and whatever.
DeleteNot wasting my time. You'd have to pay me $30 to read that garbage.
ReplyDelete?
DeleteLooks like bigfoot threatened the site with legal action because it's now gone. Maybe bigfoot is a magician ? He should be opening up in Vegas replacing Chris Angel.
ReplyDeleteEight days have now passed since the paper has been released. Where are any big name people in the science world proving the data is wrong? I see lots of cracker jack doctors and people claiming to be cracker jack doctors talking crap about how it was released but no one has yet come forward and shown the data as wrong.
ReplyDeleteYou would think eight days is plenty long enough to read 63 pages and look over the data? Hell I did it in three hours and compared it to other dna reports even. But I am not a doctor or even a cracker jack one. Looks like time will tell here. No one wants to step up and say it is wrong. Except for people on here who can't support their claims other than with "I am a graduate/genetist/doctor/ and I say it is wrong" But lack proof, a name, or are just plain full of crap.
I want to see reports from real scienctists and genetic specialists testing the data. Not more troll fodder.
How about it? Anyone got links to real people proving it bad? Or good even?
There's no monkey. Get over it.
DeleteJim, if she has anything decent then eventually some qualified person will support and help draw attention to the paper. That could take time ,though. Its not like it was published in Current Bio or even PLOS and she is not giving any talks. Furthermore, we have to admit most life scientists blow this topic off.
DeleteBig J,
DeleteYea its basically all these Anonymous people who "SAY" they have Degree's and all they say is its crap. They can not seem to explain in detail why it is. It comes to Melba's rep. Not the Data.
For starters, you can look at these reactions.
Deletehttp://blog.chron.com/sciguy/2013/02/what-do-geneticists-think-of-the-bigfoot-paper/
If you go to Kruglyak's twitter feed and go to the 13th or 14th, he evaluates some of the sequences Ketchum published in the supplements - as an html file, not in some form that makes it easy to search. He finds sequences consistent with possum, coyote, human, etc., but no unidentified hominins.
3:29 can't get over it's inside his mind and must spam daily to exorcise the demon.
Delete
DeleteThis seems to be Krugyak.s last tweet on the subject :
"PCR failures, sequence analysis doesn't make sense. can't really tell until they release raw seq data."
Which reads to me that a definitive conclusion cannot be made until raw data is available so trying to run what has been presented in the paper in it's current format through blast is likely to result in just about anything mammalian.
This comes back to not understanding how to present sequence data, it's ironic that Ketchum mentions the Lesula paper as a comparison to hers as examining it may have given her some clues as to how to present her own.
That being said I hope someone in the genomics field can sort this out and point the finger at exactly where the problem lies if any.
The Swenson guy has been testing the data. He has apparently gotten the same results as the paper and independant labs did. He is continuing testing but is more sure the data is correct and bigfoot is real. With a very strange dna. We should hear more in a couple hours as Dr Swenson's posts start getting spread around.
Delete@2:47. My mistake, Kruglyak retweeted a Carl Zimmer retweet of a Konrad Karczewski tweet listing what the sequences matched. "A quick blast of some sequence is a mix of species DNA, some human, cat, rhesus, and... panda!?" Others found sequences matching cow and horse. In short, it sounds like a hodgepodge of different species that you might expect to be wandering around the wilderness, mixed in with contamination.
DeleteMeanwhile, John Timmer actually discusses the results in some detail at this link. http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/02/bigfoot-genome-paper-conclusively-proves-that-sasquatch-is-real/
The title is ironic; Timmer goes through and points out several flaws in the results. Specifically, the mtDNA doesn't match with Ketchum's timeline -- there were no Europeans or Africans in America 15,000 years ago -- and that Ketchum didn't isolate the non-human DNA sequences and see if they matched up with any known species. As I note above, when that is done, it comes back as known species.
Damn. I just got off work and can't find it. :( Is it gone already?
ReplyDeleteIt's easy. Just google Novel North American Hominins venomdoc and then click on View as HTML.
DeleteDon't waste your time.
DeleteGOT IT! Thanks buddy!
DeleteLeroy Jethro Gibbs slaps ya on the back of da Heed!
ReplyDeleteWell, I read the paper as well....
ReplyDeleteWould like to actually SEE the pictures and video Melba claims she has to back it up.
IF (granted a BIG IF) she can provide these pictures and video THEN we as in the skeptics and believers, can go over said pictures and video THEN decide what we think.
To just say "its a good/bad" paper without any credentials basically means NOTHING unless YOU are willing to list YOUR name and credentials AND say why, in a SCIENTIFIC manner.
Which I don't see ANY of the people that have listed here so far doing.
I am not saying its a good or bad paper (hey what do
-I- know about DNA anyways) but I AM saying that the 'proof' is, or at least should be, in the pictures and video she claims to have that back the paper up.
Myself I don't care if she self-published or not, at least she DID give SOMETHING as results even though its now loose for free on the web and no matter what she does there is NO stopping that entirely.
Amen. But she can contact each site and if sbe really wants to, go after several in court. But like you said, it is out there. Now let us see what the real knowers in science say.
DeleteReal knowers? Don't put your hope in mainstream science they're part of the status quo cover-up.
DeleteHas anyone downloaded the pdf.file (not the html) and can send it to me? Would like to read it with figures!
ReplyDeleteAre you talking about the tables? They're so poorly formatted in the pdf as to be unreadable.
DeleteYes, can you oder someoneelse please send it?:
ReplyDeletehans.buttkewitz@gmx.de
The оtheг day, ωhile I ωas at ωorκ, my cousіn stolе my apрle ipad and tested to see
ReplyDeleteif it cаn surviνe а 25 fоot ԁгор,
juѕt so she can bе a youtube
sensation. My iРad is noω broken and she has 83 vieωs.
I knoω thіs іs totally off topіс but I had to share it ωіth
someone!
mу web-site ... herbal party pills
Great post. I was checking constantly this blog and I'm impressed! Extremely helpful information particularly the last part :) I care for such info much. I was seeking this certain information for a very long time. Thank you and good luck.
ReplyDeleteAlso visit my website ... Mulberry Bags
Hello there, I discovered your website by the use of Google even as looking for a related matter, your site came up, it looks
ReplyDeletegood. I have bookmarked it in my google bookmarks.
Hello there, just was alert to your blog through Google, and
found that it's really informative. I am going to be careful for brussels. I'll be grateful in
case you continue this in future. A lot of other people will probably
be benefited from your writing. Cheers!
My web blog: Louis Vuitton Handbags Outlet
Hey there would you mind letting me know which hosting company you're using? I've loaded your blog in 3 completely different internet browsers and I must say
ReplyDeletethis blog loads a lot quicker then most. Can you recommend a good hosting provider at a
reasonable price? Cheers, I appreciate it!
Feel free to visit my site - http://www.tedxyse.com/gafasoakley.html
Hi Dear, are you truly visiting this site daily, if so after
ReplyDeletethat you will without doubt get nice knowledge.
Feel free to surf to my website: Louis Vuitton Pas Cher
It's an amazing piece of writing designed for all the online people; they will obtain benefit from it I am sure.
ReplyDeleteFeel free to visit my blog post :: Chaussure De Foot
There are certain determined ingredients a Black additionally Decker brewer demands to gives.
ReplyDeleteExtra high blood pressure levels found concerning diabetics maximizes opportunity of
solar power deprivation correct by promoting impotence problems
or a erection dysfunction. To award winning of work from home, being familiar with sight advertising is important.
My web site ... cooks coffee pot replacement carafe - coffeemakersnow.com -
If you are hoping concerning pretty foam-free juice, all of the L'Equip juice extractor can offer to your website clear plus clear. Truth teeth yellowing while an incredible apple maybe a carrot seems brown colored is sign your name on that your choice of fruit or vegetable can be oxidized and may even happed before an works on a huge charge, this information . you possibly can each time bottled too tinned veggie juice is considered to be purchased at retail store. To conclude, you would look on reputable financial advisor via the internet retail shops to shopping transactions online shops for instance The amazon online marketplace, Hunting.world wide web and Purchase for customer comments and additionally comparisons. A suitable food processor or blender will not likely.
ReplyDeleteMy webpage :: best blender reviews **
Which Is The Best Tandum Clothing Juice machine?
ReplyDeleteYou can find a the amount of completely different kinds of
Connector Lalanne Electric energy Juice machines.
Usually there are some mixers thatrrrs available yesterday even so should select the optimum blender for your requirements.
Feel free to surf to my webpage moulinex hand blender and food processor
Verizon аnnοunсed toԁay that
ReplyDeletea recent аdԁition to the range and сeгtainly сovers an aгeа of thе marκet.
Νow you can push thе rumoгs, early intгoduсtіons anԁ
otheг pre-announcement rаmblings аsiԁе and focus on the obѵiοuѕ thіng еvеn without you prompting it
to. Poweгed by Gоogle's Android operating system and great user experience, the Blackberry Nexus would also prove to be a slight issue with the stock browser in that it is preloaded with Android 2. In our use of the Bluetooth version 2.
Feel free to surf to my page - blackberry - http://lorestoryworld.net -
It's very effortless to find out any topic on web as compared to textbooks, as I found this post at this site.
ReplyDeleteFeel free to visit my web site ... Christian Louboutin - ngosummit.com -
I enjoy reading through a post that can make men and women think.
ReplyDeleteAlso, many thanks for allowing for me to comment!
Here is my page: master cleanse secrets *http://www.new-articles-sites.info/*
Hello to all, it's genuinely a pleasant for me to pay a visit this website, it consists of important Information.
ReplyDeleteLook into my site - usb mp3 player