Dr. Haskell Hart's Full Breakdown of The Ketchum Bigfoot DNA Paper
Are you still confused about the whole Ketchum debacle? If you're confused, be prepared to be even more confused. Though this debate has been beaten to death, there's still one person who deserves some attention. Meet Dr. Haskell Hart. Haskell has been following the Ketchum report since it surfaced in 2013 and after reviewing the paper, he became extremely skeptical of Dr. Melba Ketchum's claim. Below is an attachment of Dr. Haskell's paper on Ketchum's DNA project. It's a damning report and it thourougly breaks down Ketchum's claims. Before getting into that, listen to this interview with David Paulides, who helped kick start the Ketchum Bigfoot DNA study. Paulides believes Bigfoot is more human than ape:
H V Hart Distinguishing Related Species w Preface
PREFACE
Although my education and professional experience are in the fields of physical, inorganic, and analytically chemistry, I have been interested in natural history since childhood and have followed the bigfoot phenomenon for many years. I hold two patents involving construction and utilization of databases and have used other databases extensively in diverse areas of analytically chemistry. I consider this adequate preparation for the work described below, but I am no expert in this field. Admittedly I had to learn critical details of the specific databases and search algorithms involved in species identification from DNA sequences.
In February, 2013, like many others, I was fascinated by the article by Dr. Melba Ketchum et al. reporting the sequencing of DNA purportedly from a number of sasquatch or bigfoot. Curious about these sequences, I set out to learn more about their homology to humans and other primates. The search strategy and match details were not reported in the Ketchum paper, so I decided to take a fresh look at it all. I had hoped to be able to support her claims.
My initial impression after some preliminary searches was that the three published nuDNA sequences showed significant homology to humans, but not to any other non-primate species. I had not yet learned all the features of the NCBI (National Center for Biotechnology Information, a division of the National Library of Medicine at the National Institutes of Health) databases and the BLAST search program and its output. I was mistaken in the case of two of the sample sequences (S26 and S140) as subsequent investigation was to show.
After discovering several key points about the contents of the databases and the search output and performing many additional searches my conclusions were that S26 is from a bear, most likely a black bear (the same conclusion was reached by two other researchers on the same split sample), and S140 is from a dog. No primates matched these sequences as well, nor did any other known species. I wrote my first paper on these results and submitted it to Dr. Ketchum for publication in her new DeNovo journal. After some months without a response I withdrew the manuscript. She said she had a hard time finding reviewers. The paper below supersedes this earlier version. I added new results and improved the presentation.
Click here to download the full report.
Sykes says no bigfoot but he found a hybrid bear which is pretty cool
ReplyDeleteIf he's already broken the fundemental rule of peer review by publicly stating it's results in a documentary... Then what's taken all this time to publish?
Delete; )
Peer reviewing the sequencing of a previously extinct bear, and attempting to distinguish if it came from the legitimately extinct known bear or a an undiscovered bear in the Himalayan range descended from the extinct bear.
DeleteI believe genetic work up on two species of bear in the Himalaya's are incomplete, so perhaps that sequencing he discovered is a full work up of a previous unsequenced known bear.
Peer review always takes months, even years for the most perfect papers. It goes through multiple stages before being accepted and published.
Acceptance without a type specimen is a decent feat, I'm sure his bear results where really put through the meat grinder because they had no type specimen (at least known to us.)
DeleteClutching at straws much? Ha ha ha ha!!
DeleteI'm sorry, it is a fundamental no-no to reveal any results or significant discovery, that is in turn going to go through peer review, to the public in a documentary.
This is very basic stuff.
Also... We it is common knowledge that Sykes is conducting three studies in one; notably the Patrick legends. By the time this comes around, I will be here to remind you how wrong you have been, regardless of the results.
Also; for someone in so much denial of the long term study, I have no doubt you'll celebrate it and your denial will erode should Sykes state that he has found nothing remotely Bigfooty.
lol still at it, huh, PJ?
DeleteYou'll certainly never live down all your puke should Sykes reveal zero bigfooties.
Won't I?
DeleteI can assure you, in fact... I can 100% guarantee you that should Sykes deliver nothing remotely Bigfooty, that I'll still be here fighting my own battles and giving you your little meltdowns three times weekly.
Sykes has ever... Will ever only be as good as his samples.
Joe already on damage limitation knowing full well Sykes will say no bigfoot.
DeleteThis whole thing about not discussing peer reviewed results before publication is nonsense. Contents of papers can be and are regularly discussed in the scientific arena/ seminars/ even on TV shows before publication occurs. It is Ketchum who invented the whole "results can not be discussed before publication" nonsense.
Looney toons.
Damage limitation or reality?
DeleteIt is a negative proof fallacy to suggest that a lack of one source of evidence, constitutes lack of investigative subject... Even more so when merely more samples can be studied for a forever amount of time. This is very, very basic stuff and I am not surprised looking at your understanding of how peer review processes work.
(Sigh)
Sykes will and only be as good as his samples, but I have no problem with stating publicly that I have a good feeling he has. I even put myself forward for a bet between Mike and Dan yesterday, a bet that Dan wasn't too confident in taking I might add.
And no... You cannot present a new hybrid bear discovery to the public and then expect it to go through peer review. Seminars and TV appearances regarding the subject matter being reviewed are very common; nothing else.
"The results aired on the television shows do not compromise Bryan’s paper in peer review. The show is purely entertainment and as I said before, we had no control over it. So the concerns of some people who think that results revealed in the show are leaks from the paper are unfounded. We kept things quiet for so long, why would we suddenly “leak” anything? We are a professional organization and adhere to the proper scientific process."
Also...
"His investigations featured in a new three-part Channel 4 documentary series, Bigfoot Files, which starts on Sunday.
A book by Prof Sykes about his research, The Yeti Enigma: A DNA Detective Story, is to be published next spring."
This is what is going to happen to the bear results, it's merely going to be published in a book. This does not reflect a hominid study that is going through a peer review process.
Straws... Clutching... Much?
Wow just wow.
Delete"And no... You cannot present a new hybrid bear discovery to the public and then expect it to go through peer review."
Why not?
Of course you can. And we will see exactly that when his paper on the hybrid bear is published.
Will not be forgetting this quote of yours so enjoy getting called on it in the future.
Hmm...your baiting skills have been failing you for a few weeks now, Joe.
DeleteGotta have something better than that to entice a good response. If England actually made it past the first round, I may grant you a pass but seeing as they didn't...what's your excuse?
I think you just got made to look silly.
DeleteDan, Wales didn't even qualify.
DeleteDanny, you are a paranoid mess... You keep thinking people are baiting you, when nobody really cares. My comments are exactly the same when you are not around.
DeleteIt's simple. England were a mixture of not good enough and unlucky and have the best and most physical league in the world to take it's toll in a climate they are really not used to.
Simple as that.
Welsh kids are brought up to play rugby, not football. This means we have a very limited production line of top players coming through, but regardless we've still managed to develop arguably the best player in the world in Gareth Bale. Also... If Wales had a pool of nations as easy as the USA have every time they qualify, then we'd be in there too.
DeleteYou think a lot of batsh*t cooky things.
DeleteYou were waiting with baited breath after commenting about a bet and bringing my name up.
I responded earlier this morning in full, to Mike and you in that thread.
America is in the Group of Death, and still advances further than England. Soccer isn't close to the biggest sport in America, until this past years announcement of MLS expansion teams and the drawing of Silva, Kaka, etc. it was even smaller. Jose Altidore isn't that good but he's by far our best player, he's a club player, yet here we are playing Belgium in round of 16 missing our star player since mid-play of the first game.
DeleteBTW, LOL @ Gareth Bale being the best soccer player in the world!
Come on Danny, do you believe these things you post sometimes? I have now baited you with a bet? Didn't you say yesterday you post things just for the heck of it? Surely you can't be this paranoid??
DeleteTo be honest; I'm glad you didn't take the bet there Danny. I want you of all people around when these results come through, to answer some very over due questions, and so I can also p** on the parade should it pan out differently.
Group of death, could be a decent enough label for England's group with the likes of Italy and Uruguay in it. Ghana who are hit and miss have been totally outshone by the likes of Costa Rica who have been excellent.
DeleteSoccer isn't close to the biggest sport in America, yes... That's why you tend to have most of the team with ethnicity coming from countries where it is;
Jozy Altidore: Born in Livingston, N.J., to two Haitian-born parents.
Alejandro Bedoya: Born in Englewood, N.J., to two Colombian-born parents
Julian Green: Born in Tampa, Fla., to an American serviceman father and a German mother; moved to Germany with his mother as a young child.
Tim Howard: Born in New Brunswick, N.J., to an African-American father and his Hungarian mother.
Aron Johannsson: Born in Mobile, Ala., to Icelandic parents.
Omar Gonzalez: Born in Dallas, Texas, to Mexican parents.
The other five were not born in the United States but have at least one parent who is an American. (In four of the cases, their fathers were in the United States military serving abroad.) That entitles them to all to U.S. citizenship, meaning they did not have to go through the immigration process noncitizens do.
John Brooks: Born in Berlin, Germany, to an American serviceman father and a German mother.
Timmy Chandler: Born in Frankfurt, Germany, to an American serviceman father and a German mother.
Mix Diskerud: Born in Oslo, Norway, to a Norwegian father and an American mother.
Fabian Johnson: Born in Munich, Germany, to an American serviceman father a German-born mother who had an American father.
Jermaine Jones: Born in Frankfurt, Germany, to an American serviceman father and German mother.
Gareth Bale is easily one of the best footballer on the planet, ARGUABLY the best and is still young.
Buy hey! You're talking to a guy that cheers the US on, loves their dynamic style of play and would very much like to see the US develop their 'soccer'.
Sincerely.
If you're that confident, if you want me involved in the bet, we must have Matt K. or Shawn be the authoritative mediator.
DeleteIf you win, ban my name, IP, all of it. I'll stick solely to BFF and you can run wild trashing me to your heart's content.
If I win, the above is applied to your account.
BUT if we're BOTH WRONG, then BOTH of us receive as full of a ban that is possible by blogger. Neither of us will have a leg to stand on.
How is that? Hell, I wish option 3 happens so this place might have a decent future.
Shawn, Matt K.? If you read this, acknowledge it.
A touch on the racial side, don't you think, Joe? Sounds like you have an issue with America's naturalization and citizenry laws, or at least use it as an excuse for why a mid-tier country in the sport, with a defense ranked 31 out of 32, made it further than a powerhouse that has won 3 (?) world cups and have depth.
DeleteUSA has nobody to competently replace their injured star...Powerhouses like Germany have 'Stieger riding the pine!
Ronaldo, Neymar > Bale
Bit of a meltdown with the bet there, Danny? Nope! Neither of us are getting out of the aftermath of these results, that's unless Mike wants to take you up? I want you around and I want me around for the results; simple as that.
Delete; )
Racial side? Ummmm, hard to not consider ethnicity... When we're comparing talent of international teams, eh? The 'issue' would be you deflecting from the fact that your national side has a major pool of talent that can be attributed to outside sources, I am in fact, the least person concerned with your naturalization and citizenry laws, ha ha ha ha!! If you knew anything about football, you'd know this is a hot topic with Diego Costa playing for Spain, the prospect of Januzaj playing for England and even down to foreign coaches at international level.
Altidore isn't there 'star' anyway. Far more accomplished players in that side.
Oh... And it's more like Messi - Ronaldo - Suarez - Bale.
DeleteA bet with no stakes is not a bet worth taking. If you're serious about it, and not just running your mouth (as per usual), then you'd accept a bet with high stakes over a petty bragging right. Apparently, you just aren't on my level. After all the rehashing of bets and old comments, I thought you were confident in your self and your predictions. I mean, Rhettman Mullis, right? WWRMD?
DeleteYou hopped on that bandwagon, Joe, remember "Actually, I'm in" were your words. That will be the third time now you have said that yet failed to assume responsibility, so again, your accountability is waning. Stop trying to allow your friends to take your fall. I know they'll stand up for you, that was never in question. Your personal responsibilty, integrity, and accountability are the items consistently in question. Hence the reason I initially was uninterested in rehashing the subject, I don't believe you and don't believe you'd live up to your end...which is why I ask for an authoritative mediator to ensure and enforce both sides comply fully to the terms.
If you're not on my level, Joe, it's ok. Most men aren't. That's a shoutout to you, TBP, you racist dirtbag.
Remember you pantsed it yesterday Danny... no one else, in reflection I've come to the conclusion that I want you here, no running away should Sykes deliver. I think you're only running YOUR mouth now because you know this. 'High stakes'? Awh Danny, you're really showing how much this blog means to you, eh? Either that or how much little else goes down in the world of Danny Campbell.
DeleteNobody rehashed old bets Danny, again, I think you're slipping into another 'episode' where you think people are baiting you... You genuinely had my sincerest heartfelt concern the other day, I wouldn't talk so tough when you appeared so helpless not a week ago.
I am confident, not to mention understandably hopeful that Sykes has something to be honest... But confident enough to state I'm confident, you catch my drift? I stand by Mullis as did you Danny... As did you.
Is he legit, or not??
" Stop trying to allow your friends to take your fall...." Blah, blah, blah, blah...
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Fart!
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
So, you jump in on a bet about what exactly? It's not a bet without stakes, just another day. Why tug Mike's jimmy about it too? If you want a bet, be a man and make that bet. Otherwise nothing changes, it's just another day.
DeleteThis place has a place in Dan Campbell's heart, sure, he's spent a few years commenting here. Too bad Dan Campbell is only a figment of the BFE cult of personality, you do know he's not a real person, right?
You're not confident. You're just prideful. Or you truly fear us both being wrong, and don't want to lose BFE.
Oh dear old Danny, please don't make me cringe any further, you know that I know it's your real name.
Delete(Cringe)
I've explained my stance, on reflection I want you around, it's as easy as that... You're not getting into a bet where you can run away, and it's not in my nature to not face up to the attacks. I want you here, I want to talk to you after the results, I want to read what creativity you have mustered.
So let's not maintain an avenue that you jibbed yesterday, and let's not maintain that isn't your real name any longer, cause you know I know it is.
(Cringe)
Yep. Real name. Never would have chosen two prominent scotch/Irish names to use as a throwback to my heritage. I'm not clever enough for schemes of that nature, on the heels of a terrific showing (sea it?) with Mike Honcho.
DeleteYou didn't propose a bet, you jest, you waste time.
Get to my level or hop off this rod (sea it?)
Joe Fitz, despite your posturing there is no body and no DNA evidence as of yet.
DeleteAs much as i would love to see evidence of both types, until such time as one or both are public, the case for bigfoot will remain in the hands of amateurs, fuzzy videos/photos, foot print casts and anecdotal stories. All circumstantial and the sum total hasn't been enough to convince the majority of folks that bigfoots are real.
I'm on the fence as well, the circumstantial evidence is very interesting to me but without a body I'm will remain on the fence.
(Cringe)
DeleteDanny, it your real name. You've been caught out before, please stop, it's getting pretty nai
Oh, and it's Scottish... 'Scotch' is for produce.
(Sigh)
See ya later.
As an American, I had no idea the world cup was going on until the Google doodle told me.
DeleteSoccer sucks.
8:30... Your standpoint is respected, I however see sources of evidence a little more significant.
DeleteDermals that transition decades and States with same species traits found 50 miles into wilderness areas.
Unknown primate hair confirmed by primatologists & wildlife biologists... Multiple examples of it with species traits and morphological consistency means it cannot be hoaxed or from any known animal, found near tracks and sightings.
Add a complex application of forensic scientific methods, a study of dermal ridges that outline a species, that in comparison has not been applied to any other subject of wildlife biology (and therefore far more profound a result), then you have something very serious a means to have science out down their dogmatic stance. Pair this with sightings and the hair accumulation from the same source, sometimes in the exact same instance, then it is in fact unscientific and grossly denialist to at the very least, consider 'something' is going on, which is more than what mainstream science is thinking.
You don't classify anything by these methods, but you are very close to something as profound as you like. These two sources of evidence are accumulated and verified by professionals that have used the exact same scientific methods that have excelled them above the majority in their respected fields, yet they are simply brandished as 'Bigfooters' when they apply their impartial expertise. DNA will do it as I think we're no closer to identifying areas of wilderness where these subjects are in preference of burying their dead.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotch-Irish
DeleteIf you knew how wrong you were, your head might explode.
PJ, close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.
DeleteWith science you have nothing except allegations until you have conclusive, peer-reviewed, roundly accepted biological evidence to prove your allegation. Nothing short of that. No almosts, no close, no soon, no on the brink. You have nothing and like it until you have conclusive evidence as to the opposite.
That is the way it works, like it or loathe it, if you want to change the system you must start on the inside, not bashing it in a fit of pent up frustration on an obscure online blog.
Well. Hmmmm. Good read. Two of my favorite posters up there. Better brains. That's for sure. What would a drunken hillbilly from Alamo Heights have to say about the terms of a bit. Hmmmm. I say. Lay out the terms. Place the bet and honor it beyond all others. There's still some great places to post out there. Kelly Shaws thread is the real deal. I'm your huckleberry. But I say just make it through Halloweeen. I'm a big softie. Id miss you guys too much. Losers leave town (BFE) through Halloween. Shawn moderates. I'm in. Now. What's the bet. If Sykes doesn't find X then Y. Let's hear it. And am I really in? "I reckon so". :)
DeleteC'mon. We could all use a summer off. Even when I was an 18 year old kid my parents suggested I might have a slight drinking problem. I had smoked a fat J and had mistakenly mowed the neighbors yard. My father suggested it was a beautiful vertical cut pattern... But not our property so he couldn't pay me. I'm trying to be fair here.
DeleteI see your POV, Mike, but from my POV it's looking like a repeat of just another situation where PJ writes a check that his ass can't cash, then slips into a protective shell while his friends take try to take the fall for him.
DeleteMy stakes are posted @ 5:34, no more, no less. Without Matt or Shawn's acknowledgement and officiating, without PJ inked to it, and I'm not interested.
Stop playing Red Rover, Joe, stop wasting time, stand up for your words for once on this blog and take a high stakes bet.
You called down the thunder, well now you've got it.
Carrying on yesterday's thread is pretty simple. I believe there is more than one type specimen of these subjects. Coonbo seems to think their territories overlap. That may be so. Again I repeat :), Patty type. Larger, coned head, bigger, more associated with Pacific Northwest, there's the stockier, more rounded heads, with almost human like faces, hair grows in a bun, semi- conical head, then gorilla snout dog-man types, not very friendly at all. I believe the first type may be the most rare, type two are much more common and type three may be nothing more than a genetic commonly reoccurring abnormality of type 2. I know you don't believe in the wide dispresement of the Subjects Dan. What if I told you they were far more common than say , wolverines or lynx for example. What if I told you there were more in Texas than California? What if I told you it's not that big of a secret that wildlife employees and conservation agents don't even bother explaining what they are covering up. That they can rely on most foolish footers to margianilize themselves based on their own behavior? Look. My beliefs are based on two full years of ranching and squatching. I'll probably give up the Farmer/Footer Mike persona and go back go kicking prosecutors asses by this winter. But while I'm here we might as well have fun. And I thank you for sharing what you did a few threads back.
DeleteScience does not ignore evidence until biological evidence (in your case body) is classified, that is an embarrassing missunderstanding of the process of scientific research and heuristics; this being the very thing that the scientific model was designed against. Science in fact analyzes the data impartially and uses that as a means to investigate further until such a conclusion is reached.
DeleteNobody has suggested that the sources I referenced up top classify a species, but what you do have is unshakable sources of both physical and biological sources that point to an unknown primate leaving it. To deny that is to deny scientific methods that have held held those professions as reliable for decades, and is simply; gross denial. To state that those methods do not count until a final conclusion that is only achievable through a chain of events by which such methods are applied, don't count... Is not undertanding how those methods work.
Do you think that the panda and the gorilla was classified once it fell into the laps of those theorising about it? People had to work very hard off the back of physical clues and anecdotal sources to chase up and eventually categorise such species'.
I can't believe I have to go through this with an adult.
What genetic abnormality would turn a normal, or early generation inbred Sasquatch into a snout faced, dog/gorilla looking beast? They are so close to, or are (lol) modern humans and I certainly can't recall man-dogs on any episodes of Ripleys! or House. Or this gigantic relic on my desk known as a medical encyclopedia but to be fair, it's print date was probably sometime in the mid-60's.
Delete"What if I told you..."
I'd say show me the body, Rick.
DeleteMike BrookresonMonday, June 30, 2014 at 11:51:00 AM PDT
Dan. How bouts you quit taking shots and call it again double or nothing. No money down. Interest free, first 90 days. 2 table dances for the price of one. Just make a prediction and then back to the shadow with you. :)
j************d verifiedMonday, June 30, 2014 at 11:55:00 AM PDT
Ha ha ha ha!!!! D'you know, I might be in on this one too.
j************d verifiedMonday, June 30, 2014 at 11:59:00 AM PDT
Actually, I'm in.
Daniel CampbellMonday, June 30, 2014 at 7:41:00 PM PDT
I don't believe PJ has the integrity or wherewithal to follow up on a bet. He's slinked out of one multiple times.
Forgive me if I am less than interested.
Do all these different Squatch types live together? Like Standings odd bigfoot collection?
http://bigfootevidence.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/when-cops-say-theyve-seen-sasquatch-i.html?m=0
It's all there Danny, now that to me looks like you bottled it, nobody else. In that time I've decided I want you here, I want me here to have the chance to go at it. Funny that now that your nerves are showing, that you want this bet to run away and face answering your ignorance SHOULD Sykes deliver.
Not only do you have a 'bad memory', but you ain't fooling anyone either.
Ok. Fair enough. The terms. The stakes are fair. But what are the terms. If Sykes paper finds evidence of a Hominid that was either thought extinct in the fossil record and has been proven to either still be living or had survived well beyond previous carbon dating and Through Sykes' paper it is revealed to have mixed nd interbreed with modern Homo Sapien then Joe wins and you must surrender BFE in all it's glory to him until the witching hour of midnight All Hallows' Eve. However, if Sykes finds much ado about nothing, and it's all Lions and Tigers and new Bears oh my, and nothing to do with a new previously undiscovered human type or hominid that survived to interbreed into the modern era, last 13,000 years or so, creating any type of hybrid species which has been peeking at me from beyond my Cypress tree, well then you win and it's back to the shadows with Fitzie, same bat terms, same bat channel. I'll email Shawn now and I'm in. It's just really that simple. I'll have to stick with Joe Dan, I come with them that brung me, though I have no desire to see you lose anything. I just love the action. So I'm in. Before I drag poor Shawn into this are we "all in?"
DeleteAnd I can't believe I have to point out the difference between the field research and the official stance and listing of biological entities to an adult from a theoretical stand point.
DeleteI have always maintained the official stance. You apparently have never comprehended that in your fervor.
All this time, that's why you are so argumentative? You didn't understand I maintain official reference? Bigfoot does not officially exist, you're an idiot if you attempt to argue (again) on that stance.
Shawn. Dear God. I'm trying to establish a gentlemans wager. I guess white out has taken this moment of glory from me. :)
DeleteMike, fix your white out. Impossible to read on my iPhone.
DeleteWell Lord knows I tried. Here goes nada. If Sykes doesn't deliver a true collateral hominid. Something that was thought extinct or bred out from the fossil record but actually survived to breed with modern humans and produce these new types I could be seeing in the creeks, caves and arroyos of my ranch I lose. And I'm gone though All Hallows' Eve. One summer off to have to read the mockery that I rightfully brought upon myself. Wise Man say...too much talk makes air full of carbon. And speaker full of sh1t...:)
DeleteMy bet is with myself. So I know I can't trust this guy. But i feel he will honor it. I laid out a much better bet. But I used Joes real name. The Damn troll wars caused white out and name verification so we can't go back and establish a bet based on the old....troll wars. Ohhhh the ironic horror!!!
DeleteMy stance has always been Sykes doesn't provide roundly accepted conclusive evidence of Sasquatch, as termed in modern culture (standard 9ft 1000lb hair covered man beast), specifically North America but I'll scope it to worldwide. This result must be a living creature, not some 10,000 year old finger bone showing hominid.
DeleteI will even play to Joe's whim, since you want me around as a heavy bag if you win, PJ, how about you provide your terms for me. The stakes on you are still the same but you chose my destiny or ban date.
However, I maintain that if both our speculations are wrong, we BOTH have all commenting ties severed with BFE.
This is a fair bet. I give you free reign on my penalty shall I lose.
B@II is in your court. Don't squander this opportunity like England in the WC.
BTW, tell me more about how Scotch-Irish isn't a thing...
DeleteJoe. I'll latch on to anything you bet. But you must in my opinion accept this. If you let him off now he will develop a super ego so big it will develop its own atmosphere. There will be weather events within it. Super patterns of activity beyond the scope of modern meteorology. I swear on Lionel Messi's prefect hair that I will honor it by its terms. The summer is enough. Don't carry this burden forever.
DeleteNo Danny... If you had a grasp of field research then you wouldn't keep missunderstanding it's methods, or keep farting around it's consistent application by reputable people using such to exceed all others in their respected careers.
DeleteMainstream science states that Sasquatch doesn't officially exist, it also refuses to investigate the accumilation of sources attained by experts it celebrated in their very same careers.
I tell you what, I'm confident enough he's got something, I'm in...
DeleteIf Sykes has something remotely attributed to a Bigfoot/hominid, then Danny's gone.
If he has nothing, I'm gone.
"Scotch is an adjective meaning "of Scotland". In Scotland the modern usage in Scotland is Scottish or Scots, and the word "Scotch" is only applied to specific products, mostly food or drink, such as Scotch whisky, Scotch pie, Scotch broth, and Scotch eggs. "Scotch" applied to people is widely considered pejorative in Scotland, reflecting old Anglo-Scottish antagonisms, but it is still widely used in England and Ireland, and is in common use in North America."
Scotch where I'm from is a garden variety adhesive tape with a number of practical uses. It is also a distilled whiskey variety I've enjoyed whether it be Glen or Cutty. Either way I'm in through midnight Halloween. Then I'll log back into just to say Boo. And there you have it...gooooooaaaal!
DeleteMike, it's not even an ego. It's what has become expected of Joe, honestly. I expect him to run his mouth and back out, I expect him to backtrack, I expect a lot unsavory and quite honestly, disappointing things from Joe. It's who he has become. I didn't make him that way.
DeleteWell rattle my bones and call me Michael J, Looky here!
DeleteIt must be a living, modern creature/recent sample...not some 10,000 year old finger bone from an Asian cave resulting in hominid. It must be scientifically linked to sample with proper provenance (to be expected of a peer reviewed work)
Also, bear in mind that I'm a native of the Keystone State. Historical, colonial, heavy Dutch, lots of immigrants and Scotsman passed through and it's still a relevant part of local and familia history. Scotch-Irish American is still a relevant term in the mid-Atlantic and New England region.
But if you want the other version, I can do that too:
DeleteI'm of Scots/Irish-German descent.
Nope Danny!
DeleteBaring in mind one of the main studies is revolving around human hybrids with links to abductions spanning a number of generations.
A DNA sequence that can be attributed to a Sasquatch from any scenario analysed, that has a direct link to a legend, story of Sasquatch will do it. Stop moving the goal posts, you sound scared.
I have an ego, Dan's on the same mission he's been on since I roasted him under anonimaty last summer.
And I am a perfect blend of Dutch German and Cherokee. We have crafted fine beers. Made contributions to the art world. Invaded Europe wrongfully I might add. Were a beautiful Native American culture with lighter hair and finer features. But we do react poorly on occasion to strong drink. That being said I'm still In. The bet is there. Something tells me if it's all bear Joe and I will be bitten on the ass. If it's a man, baby!, well then Dan will be scarce round these parts. Either way, what's done is done. Post as much as possible throughout today. It may be our last go.
DeleteYou guys know you're my favorite two Bigfoot personalities in the genre. I woukdnt trade you for the world. But it's alto like "Highlander" In the end, there can be only one. The rest must have their heads cut off during a freak lightening storm. In fact, it's exactly like Highlander.
DeleteDo we have a bet Dan?
DeleteDanny????
DeleteDaniel, Do we all have a bet, as they said in Trpoic Thunder parodying Ben Stiller's faux action thriller "Scorcher". It's happened again.....again. :)
DeleteI'm trying to be serious Dan. Do we have a bet? And " Who left the fridge open?"
DeleteDid he run off? He did this yesterday remember after he jibbed out then too.
DeleteHmmmm. After all that. No way! He couldn't live that down. The Americans are about to play the Belgium hemp friendly team. I've got to get my affairs in order. And get by the pool with an Amstel. Daniel. Knock it off. We are all on board here. Correcto?
DeleteXtra time. Jolly Roger yerselves till this game is over.
DeleteDamn. I feel like Luda and Little John. Joe. Were we " turned down for what???"
DeleteSorry fellas I was shooting turds out of my butt for science. But I'm back.
DeleteD Campbell.
Messi is gonna whip out a hand held mirror and score from its reflection!
DeleteI've been watching the footy as posing at the same one just fine...
DeleteWhat's the issue here?
The positive result must have proper provenance to the claim, and conclusively prove a living unknown hominid (outside of a type specimen)
DeleteI'm in if that's what you term. No backing out.
Now, this game is in my interest because America plays the winner if we advance. Later gentlemen.
Issue is this spliff in my hands, you square. Maybe you should drop the bottle and pick up the herb, it might help your outlook.
DeleteIf a Sasquatch from a few generations ago get's his DNA sequenced, then that accounts for the same subject that is being reported today.
DeleteNo point complicating things, there's either DNA there or not.
dannys all butt hurt
DeleteAnd Messi's still on for a World Cup!!!
DeleteSure, whatever, bet accepted..provided if we're BOTH wrong, we're BOTH GONE.
DeleteMark it down Matt, Shawn.
No, I don't agree to the final terms.
DeleteYou've already got an avenue of snaking in the back door witn your history of anonimaty... You're trying for two scenarios where you can do that.
DeleteIt's either you're right or I'm right... Nothing else.
Dan. In all fairness I am having difficulty attaching consideration to that last clause. Usually if both parties are wrong it's. "Push". Ie all bets are off.
Deletejoe f********* verifiedTuesday, July 1, 2014 at 10:14:00 AM PDT
DeleteI tell you what, I'm confident enough he's got something, I'm in..."
Even after the quick thinking lawyer advises to take the deal, you don't accept. I verbally submitted to allowing you to chose my own fate, followed by furthering weakening my odds by giving in to your generic, broad term above when I accepted. Now you back out again, citing...the 3rd option; if we're both wrong, we're both gone?
Personally, I think a double character murder suits the storyline perfectly. It's the one I hope for, then alas rides a lonely ranting Texan into the sunset. Can't write a better finish.
Mike, Joe, like I said before you're going to need to get to my level. If you want to roll those dice, it's high stakes. I'm at worse odds than anyone, I've bent numerous times. This stipulation was included in every post I made on the subject, noted originally at 5:34. Did you not properly read it?
DeleteOh dear, Danny... I'm still quite confident, that's why I'm taking the god damn thing.
DeleteStop stalling it'll either have DNA or it won't.
Are you in?
Hell I'm in. I was just hating to see everyone gone if, which is the likely outcome. We are all 3 as far off as we expect. But. I love the action. So. All in
DeleteJoe, I'm chancing those risks with you, no? That's why I encourage Matt/Shawn to moderate the spectacle. You'll be happy to know, I don't troll nor need a proxy service so I quit paying my monthly fee. You can choose to believe or disbelieve but it's the truth. I have my wifi connection, which can be banned and my 3G which I don't think can be banned. But then again, we're rolling the dice anyway right?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYeah, yeah... Im sure, is he bet on or not? I don't think you want it bro.
Delete12:08**
DeleteActively troll* I do slip you an occasional comment or say hi to Steve or Bill when they start a chattin.
Fortunately, I'm a very busy man these past few months so I don't need to kill many afternoons by instigating people.
12:09 was a double post. I shall delete it.
Yeah, yeah... Come on tough guy, you taking the bet or not?
DeleteNo? Yes? He's either got DNA or not... I'm under no illusion you'll be back in days under anonimaty, there is no reason for you to suggest that we both leave if we're wrong unless you're shooting for another angle to do that very thing.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAnd stop calling on Matt and Shawn like they give a crap, you're really not that important Dan and I'm sure they pretty embarassed if anything.
DeleteAre you in or what? If you maintain this obvious stance then I have another thread to show you've bottled it.
You are the King of finding your way out, aren't you? You know the one thing I won't budge on, after bending and tweaking my fate to your decision, you exploit it.
DeleteIt's been my only concrete pillar during this gigantic waste of f*cking time. Congratulations dude, you want a win so bad? Take it early, Champ! I'm about to watch America play on the biggest stage in soccer for a chance to play Argentina n the QF.
Done with your shenanigans, man. I accept your bet provided you accept my stipulation 'both gone if both wrong.' If you don't, thanks for continually dragging your feet and wasting my time.
Peace.
Also, only a dumb**s thinks a Left Back is even in the top 15 of best soccer players.
DeleteDan... I think you'll find USA might be playing... Oh, I give up.
DeleteYou bottled it.
Now stop this betting nonsesne, you have no intent on seeing through.
Enjoy the game.
Dan... He started out as a left back, he's a winger these days.
Delete(Sigh)
Sure. He's still not top 20.
DeleteI think you're scared of being wrong, and losing this place. Same as I always have, so that's why I made that stipulation, and bingo you found your loophole.
You have so much better odds than I do, right? You're that confident, right? Sykes is coming, remember? You KNOW and it's OBVIOUS as you say, that his paper is on collateral hominids and not about the bear, so that's really your only concession.
You say living bigfoot DNA, I say no living bigfoot DNA. If the paper is somehow not even on bigfoot/hominid DNA, we're both gone.
That's why you won't accept? The bear?
Don't bring Fozzie into this. :). You guys in or what? It's too hot in Texas to do anything but watch soccer and wonder what all the fuss is about? Ahh I give up. As Owen Wilson said in Bottle Rocket: " you're out, and you're out and I'm pretty sure I'm out too!"
DeleteDan... It's nice you're getting into football. Put on a YouTube video of Bale and check out a Wikipedia description of him.
DeleteLiving DNA, DNA from the last few generations, it doesn't matter. I'm still up for this bet though, you bang on about irrelevancies Dan, it's common knowledge his study is also about Sasquatch in the US Dan... Is it on?
By living I mean modern, within a few generations is acceptable. Just not some 10,000 year old stuff. Several centuries is no issue.
DeleteSince it's common knowledge about the subject of the paper, it's no issue to accept the stipulation that if it's not on collateral hominids then we're both gone?
I'll accept if you accept.
(Yawn)
DeleteIs the bet that he has DNA or not on or what?
Ok. See you later Danny!
Delete; )
Ahhhh. We are playing Belgium while one side waffles. I think I get it now. :). I ...I believe....I believe that we won't bet!
DeleteKing of deflections. Apparently you don't accept, you just want attention like a child.
DeleteHigh rollers club just denied you access for your man card. Receive your coin purse at the door, ma'am.
Do you plan on deflecting from my post till the journal is released? I know you can talk that long, but is that really what you're going to do?
Mike, talk some sense into your greasy Welsh friend.
(Cringe)
DeleteDanny, you sound like you're bordering another episode.
The bet's there is you want it... I'd check your blood pressure.
Mike, I do believe we won't bet.
(Sigh)
Sorry. The damn Beligians have brushed jumped my Texas boy Dempsey down by the goal post and I was distracted. Hell Joe. There's no dishonor in losing. We could all come back as an alter ego. If "Bud Burnswell" mysteriously appears with a solid working knowledge of country music I think we will all know where he's broadcasting from. It's all about the juice baby!!
DeleteI'm good to go... It's all on Daniel.
DeleteDamn right it's a yellow card. Tell those bastards to get off dempseys jock
DeleteNow there you have it GOOOAAALLLLL!
DeleteI'm going down to the Dutch Microbrewery to fist fight the first guy I see with too much jell or hair product. Gentlemen. It has been an honor betting with you..."barber, proceed sir"
DeleteHa ha ha ha ha!!
DeleteI see y'all are watching the game.
DeleteI got USA one goal to none for Belgium.
Mike H.
Hell Yeah! The quicker they get that Ginger Benedict Cumberbatch look alike Alexi off the screen and back to the game I'm with you Mike. The world is against us. They don't like my boy Manziel crankin his music at 4 am in Cleveland. Now they've hurt poor old Fabio what's his face in the corner and they are bush wackin Dempsey at every turn. It is ON!
DeleteDammit man I turn on the TV and it's halftime.
DeleteMike H.
Yes sir.
DeleteLmao.
Ginger Lalas.
Mike H.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!
DeleteObliterated.
ReplyDeletePoor guy.
GRAYs making hybrides and have bases been here for years -
DeleteThis is the 3rd or 4th straight destruction of Ketchum's work. Two Harvard geneticists, this guy, and one other by my count.
ReplyDeleteMaybe Melba should have went to school to learn instead trying to teach herself such a complex and encoded subject. You're a veterinarian, Ms. Ketchum-Hersom, act like one.
If you still or ever did buy into Melba and her work, if you gave her any credence or respect at all, you are a bloody gullible imbecile.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYou keep maintaining your boogie man in the dark, Mr. Gullible.
Delete4 competent and thorough breakdowns and analyzation of the work by capable university (2 IVY league) PhD's but there is still that tiny token piece of truth behind her angel DNA results, you know, the nUDNA results she later clammerred about being a giant lemur that mates with a modern homo sapien sapien female some 15,000 years ago....
SURE. Keep grasping at it, it's going swimmingly.
I'm sure you'd like to make it seem this way Danny, positive results from going toe to toe with me are limited after all... But my comment up top was pretty clear so as to save you the effort in making suggestions of my stance on her work.
DeleteMaybe you don't read properly.
Some pretty interesting occurances for a study that was so easy to take apart though? Surely there was no need for some of those measures when the study could have been left to crash and burn?
; )
She didn't get it by professionals, she had to purchase a journal to self-publish her work, Wally Hersom has had words for her for spending millions of his dollars over a span of 5+ years for a bunk paper that was brushed aside.
DeleteThere is a limited pool of people qualified to assess genetic work, an even smaller pool of qualified people to test and review newly developed primers. Those people rejected her work, as well as several qualified public scientists that fully dissected her work for the layman to read.
If you regularly visit the BFF, the hive mind of all things bigfoot, professional and amateur, majority of posters do not find any kernel of hidden truth in her work nor do they accept, repeat, or respect her shameful paper and actions.
Outside of technical flaws and speculation being rampant in her work, her personal character and actions have come under fire for the past 2 years.
You keep your ambiguous thoughts on Ketchum's work, that's fine, you are more than gullible enough. Truth, sans truth, hidden truth, interesting patterns...it's all speculation on your part.
Now there is so much in your comment that I agree with... But there are some interesting occurrences however, that maybe at least an reason behind some of her actions... Like Nature accepting the paper, sending it for peer review and the Journal of Advanced Zoological Exploration in Zoology accepted the paper, passing it at peer review, backing out of publication on the day the paper was to go live? Surely so many obvious flaws would have prohibited such a developed stage????
DeleteSo many obvious flaws that warranted so many strange occurrences?
"This study was met with outrage by some scientists, while much of the scientific community ignored it altogether. Some scientists supported it, but most were afraid of what would happen to their careers if they openly supported a study claiming to have proven the existence of the much stigmatized and controversial Sasquatch. Yet upon examination of the paper, it can be seen that it was a huge multidisciplinary effort involving a dozen labs and blind studies, and carried out by nine highly qualified scientists, aimed at quelling controversy about the discovery. Laboratories and scientists were not told what they were testing when they were contracted to test the Sasquatch samples. This ensured the integrity of the replication of the findings from test to test to test."
So many reoccurring flaws by independent contributors?????
From the headlines of this post one would think some big time geneticist penned this. Far from the case. The person states up front he is not qualified in genetics and his field is not related to it in any way. The article reads like something written by Eddie Haskell instead of Dr. Haskell. Sounded like sour grapes because his review was not accepted. Take it for what it is worth - not much.
DeleteChuck
Hey Chuck!
DeleteI am aware of some very dodgy things she's done, but there are too many question marks that would lead a true skeptic to ask the questions.
Joe, many papers get past the first stage, even the first few stages before they are ultimately shelved or destroyed. Just because it was accepted into initial peer review stages means nothing, there is so much technical jargon to decipher and cross reference, new primers to test and review. Her paper contained enough to warrant a further investigation, which concluded in dropping her work from Nature altogether.
DeleteShe bought that journal, no? The one that the lawyers closed down, she turned around and purchased that journal then rebranded it to publish one edition. If she was able to purchase that journal so quickly after it was supposed to have been publishing her paper, they couldn't have been in a good financial situation to begin with. The Vet and self-appointed Texan geneticist had the money laying around to purchase an entire scientific journal? Is she embezzling Wally and other footers money? She might be well off but she doesn't have the FU money to randomly purchase a publication.
A cigar is just a cigar until you show me the weed inside, you know what I'm saying?
No Danny, that doesn't explain how the Journal of Advanced Zoological Exploration in Zoology allegedly passed it at peer review. That isn't no 'first stage' Danny.
DeleteCould it be that with all these 'occurrences' that she thought "bugger it" and got Uncle Wally to folk out the cash, just so the paper is out there? Really... It doesn't really add up, if she was lying and the source so flawed, then why would she be in such a rush to get herself hanged??
Or could it be this! Could it be that the cherished, so celebrated peer review process is one that is flawed? Surely, the suggestion that this could slip through such a tried, tested & reliable process, means that it's flawed from top to bottom??
I think that with the evidence to suggest that, I'll more than likely practice true skepticims and go along with that.
Now that was 'baiting'.
; )
Just take a look at the immediate subject matter on this thread... Then take a look at some of the comments on this thread, then take a look at how many enthusiasts have slated her work... Then take a look at what source have promoted the criticism of her work...
DeleteYou'll see that 90% of it is from enthusiasts. I think Berger, like most closure desperate psuedoskeptics, would naturally celebrate such a controversial source once it comes around, it makes up for lack of legitimate argument when undeniable sources are presented with the most earth shattering of effects.
If anybody lacks a legitimate argument it's you. Prefacing a word with pseudo doesn't make it the accepted reality, but you are probably aware of that seeing as you rejected reality long ago and substituted it with your own. Unless you want professional skeptics, and then the JREF still handily own the bigfoot subculture in the scientific and biological arena.
DeleteThis thread is a microcosm of a microcosm of subculture divided into thirds. The further you go up the ladder, the bigger the joke becomes.
If you consider that as significant in the breadth of this subject, let alone the world, that is enough anyone with a education needs to evaluate your stance in life.
"Additionally, they've hijacked terms such as "rational, reason, logic, critical thinking" to mean the "proper" thinking and behavior that supports materialism and orthodoxy, and rejects against anything that challenges it. That is not what those words mean of course. It's a form of mind control and disinformation. And it seems way too calculated and militant to be due to some accidental misunderstanding, ignorance or closed mindedness. Hijacking a word to mean its opposite is more indicative of a deliberate agenda, such as a disinformation campaign or form of mind control. If that sounds terrible, well, we are here to expose it thank goodness.
DeleteFurthermore, oddly enough, they treat Science as if it were some kind of authoritarian "entity" that takes positions and views on issues (their own of course), when it is in fact merely a tool and method of inquiry based on logical principles. In reality, science does not take positions or hold dogmatic beliefs on subjects. People take positions, not Science, which holds no more views than my computer does. Science is not a living entity. These pseudoskeptics are projecting their own views and Atheistic philosophy into Science, which they hold as the ultimate authority, aka Scientism. (Oh well, I guess pseudoskeptics need something to worship too).
One thing to keep in mind. All pseudoskeptics will claim to be true skeptics, just like all high pressured salesmen claim to not be high pressure, all liars and con artists claim to be sincere, and all politicians claim to be honest. But as you know, ACTIONS speak louder than words, so the proof of what they are is in their ACTIONS, not words. If a salesman for example, told you "I am not a high pressure salesman" but then proceeds to pressure you to buy his product/service, becoming pushy and not taking no for an answer, then what do you believe, his words or his actions? Likewise, when a skeptic tells you that he is a true skeptic who is open to evidence, yet he displays all the characteristics, traits and behaviors of a pseudoskeptic, do you listen to his words or his actions? The answer is obvious."
I have yet to read any argument, let alone anything from JREF of all places that debunks methods of primatology that have determined unknown primate hair in this field. I consider that significant... I also consider your ever apparent inability to understand consistent science telling of your frustration born out of someone like me laughing at you, as you rely on these high pressure salesman for your much needed dose of reassurance, AKA; literary opium.
; )
Apparently you can't differentiate between an online forum and a professional non-profit educational foundation. There's a reason it's not made of big deal of, Joe, because it's not. Only to you and a few of the most fundamental, delusional footer. It's not even a footnote.
DeleteThere are plenty of other Skeptic Think Tanks out there systematically dismantling WOO subjects one by one. One was represented on BF: The Definitive Guide, and they cover UFO kooks a lot. That's where the real work is done, not spending time on something that has a lower probability of existing because 10 people cried about it on BFE and Google +
No, I class all Pseudoskepticism as a fundementalist quasi-religion... No different if they're brainwashing or moulding brains in a 'educational foundation', or a forum where the best they can muster are ellaborate name callings.
DeletePrimatology and it's methods to determine morphology of hair, in the same sentence as fundementialism, is in fact the very best example of it. Its a big deal to plenty of enthusiasts, more so to me because people like you are lost to present any case for not considering such a source, other than "duh, it's not there"... Pretty hilarious; makes me warm inside. You'll even go as far as denying close ups of such morphology, and you bang on about lower probabilities? Ha ha ha!!
So much 'dismantling' by these think tanks, that hominid studies are now being conducted... Ha ha ha!!! Is say they'd better not give up their day jobs me thinks.
You know all about fundamentalist quasi-religions from the past 2 years of online footing. You're probably PhD ABD on this topic.
Delete6:34 it's laughable that you cite Eric Berger's blog post on Ketchum. After all the finger-pointing by the attackers for concealing sources etc., he hypocritically did the same: his "DNA scientist" he refused to name, he protected and coddled this scientist, and this scientist is possibly a fantasy in Berger's brain.
DeleteAlso, when you see an article or post or book titled "An Honest Attempt to . . . " you know instantly that the writer is being dishonest.
Citing Berger is the skeptard equivalent of citing Ketchum. Get past it.
Haha this guy knows Ketchum's work is a train wreck. ^
DeleteIt's a measure of how few a hits you've had when you celebrate what the majority of enthusiasts condemn.
DeleteNature never accepted her paper. Where on earth did that little lie come from?
DeleteProbably the same place as the "millions" of Wally's money - it was not quite $500,000. Still theft/fraud in my book.
DeleteCampz, you know Berger's "article" is a locomotive disaster which plays games with pretend made-up scientists. Haha yourself.
DeleteFrom bigfoot files episode 2:
ReplyDeleteBryan Sykes: "Imagine the scene when you're at a particular hotspot wood and there are 2 groups of bigfootologists, one on either side of the wood that start knocking and then the others respond, it would go on for ages wouldn't it then"
Mark Evans: "Communicating to each other"
Bryan Sykes: "Yes and unknowingly ha ha ha"
(Both mark and Bryan continue to laugh)
Too easy :) Better luck next time ey Joe!
Yea but...
DeleteMark Evans: "And what about the rest of Bryan's american results?
There were 7 samples from Washington state.
2 were cows.
1 was a black bear.
1 was a white tailed deer.
Derek randles high hopes sample was canine, a wolf or a dog.
And so was the hair from marcell cagy's backyard.
And elsewhere in the USA, there was a horse in texas, a racoon in Arizona and way up in Michigan a porcupine."
Bryan Sykes: "Am I disappointed we didn't find a bigfoot? I guess it would have been fun if we had but my ambitions of the project are entirely fulfilled in that we have identified and examined the best evidence and done it in a scientific systematic and successful way, so I'm really very pleased."
:)
Hmmmm... but;
Deletehttp://www.bigfootbuzz.net/rhettman-issues-statement-about-sykes-dna-project/
Joe, What breed of people would burn a 19 year old girl who became a saint at the stake???
Deletetham folks bein islamist fer shure
DeleteCome on then own up who ponied up their $30 to buy the paper?
ReplyDeleteI bought 2
Deleteone of em fer yer saftey
DeletePut the A.I.M.S. team on it. They're very competent! Very experienced hunters, trapper or trackers. in 30+ episodes they caught NOTHING! Just like "The Finding Big foot show" (60 episodes of finding NOTHING)! Before an episode begins, you already know the out come, They will find NOTHING! Boy, are those A.I.M.S. guys good!
ReplyDeletecawz tham monsters bein hybrids and thays out thinkin that thar AIMs team - Trapper sayin right trap right place, Wild Bill- Willy eexperts in trapsand WIld Bill sayin he weres a SGT in da USMC OORAH
DeleteAnd "I" attended boot camp with him, as he failed boot camp, plus was caught in, er, a compromising position with another recruit!now do you know why he wears tight pants!
Delete^DUDE what years was this!!!!!!!!
Deletewait a tick Wild Bill said he be a Sergeant in the Marines told that to Willy.....
DeleteBuck likes pickled bigfeets.......or is that pigfeets?
DeleteBUCK dont like caves - snakes - cow birth sacs!
DeleteThey sent ol mr BEAR BEAST down to Davey Jones locker the lung blood be PROOOF
DeleteArrr that it be me hearty eold mr bear beast down @ Davy Jones Locker Arrrrrrr
DeleteYour wrong! that Old "Wild Bill" will get them, because he wears tight pants *(hint, hint) plus he failed boot camp! If he can't get em' Old Huckleberry will! He likes little girls and been arrested for it! I really think they should use Fat boy "Buck". He could fall down again, and roll right over those "West Virginia" monsters!
ReplyDeleteHow come there are no reports, NONE on any people or Livestock being killed in "West Virginia"? Yet they have at least 10 monsters there running around!
Trapper sends BUCK out as point - Buck be the best pointman Trapper ever had!
Delete^ and Huckleberry @ Trapper 6 for his safety!
DeleteBUCK the ROOKIE got the girth to clear the path
DeleteBUCK dont do snakes - just saying!
Delete^ BUCK dont like the dark - Huckleberry got BUCK hand in that dark for his safety
Deletethat aint bucks hand he be holdin in da dark
Deleteit bein Wild Bills???????
DeleteJOE . Looked at that trail cam photo from last night on this site. Looks quite interesting. Appears to be hair showing a clear separation of the shoulder muscles from the upper arm muscles.
ReplyDeleteAlso liked MK's new enhancements showing fingers in motion. Can also see the muscles move in the forearms. Damn that cowboy should have been working on the Planet of the Apes at that time and they could have had realitic costumes instead of the inoperable masks they used.
Chuck
You like little boys butts ,,,, too so that ain't sayin much !!!!!
DeleteHey Chuck!
DeleteJust went back to look at that and I do agree with you! Also, the finger & thumbs enhancement is excellent. Patterson should have been given any number of awards posthumously, that man just keeps on defying the best in the business as the years roll by, eh?
; )
Joe, Joe, Joe - You fail to see key facts. JAMEZ was a new journal and NEVER published. It tossed in the towel in the midst of the Ketchum fiasco. And then she contrived this story about buying it. She left a rather damning electronic trail, documented by Jim McClanahan, which has been discussed here many times. And then the bloke who writes the OTLS! blog proved that one of the peer-review documents, posted on Scott Carpenter's blog but according to him, provided by the cat vet, was fake. We need to recognize that Melba is toast, and just move on.
ReplyDeleteD'you know what I think? I think the whole process is BS... Every single part of it, and serves those that have either twisted agendas to promote self serving concepts, or flaw ridden reviewing processes perpetuated by the backward minded. And because of this, I am awaiting a comparative study to determine the authenticity of her results... This is what I'm hoping for in any significant data attained by Sykes.
DeleteI thought it would have been brutally obvious; that someone like me who has repeatedly and extensively maintained a particular theory as to what this subject is (which is in conflict with the results of Ketchum's study), would have registered.
But I'm not gonna stop asking the questions. There are occurrences that don't sit well with me and for all the comments on this thread, we are still no closer to quashing those occurrences.
Joe fits, it's ttl what's your email??????
DeleteTTL! Thanks
YOU aren't satisfied. Most people are. Most footers are. Don't use yourself as an example of the community thought because you are a fringe member of an already fringe group.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSorry... Way too many spelling mistakes in that comment to let lie!
DeleteReally Danny? I got you all quiet yesterday when I showed you a source to the contrary, didn't you?
For someone who's so 'fringe', I sure get your attention rather regularly.
Anything obscure or ridiculous gets my attention, it's the nature of the beast.
Deletei knows abouts tham bear beast orny critters
DeleteI think you got butthurt a long time ago and you can't quite get satisfaction...
DeleteActually.
like Wild Bill??????
DeleteDr. Haskell Hart just did an independent study on her results. She failed. What more do you want? It's not like she will ever share the data with anyone - prolly cuz it'll prove she didn't have a clue WTF she was doing.
Delete6:30 the OTLS! blog is pushes the skeptard line and personally, publicly attacks individuals by name. It's quite a freakazoid site.
Delete11:11 what do I want? Oh I don't know, how about for Haskell to be, uh, I don't know, a geneticist? That might help. Like, uh, an expert, you know?
for sure how else could Grassman - Yahoo - Cave Creature outwit Trapper, AIMS team and Wild Bill & Willy traps - they be hybrids sure enough....
ReplyDeleteAIMS hunted that thar Lizard Demon it be a hybrid but wernt able to trap that critter! but thays but some rounds down range on that lizard critter.
DeleteBut trappers addicted to sheepsquatch piss..........
DeleteTrapper aint been right after gitin that thar sheepsquatch piss in his eyes
DeleteI say this; 'The Mountain Monster" is the most stupidest show on T.V."! it's for the weak minded people.
DeleteI will also predict this; "No monster will be caught or killed, THAT THEY CAN SHOW"! It's all BS!
Fact: one of them is a registered sex offender, guess which one?
tham AIMS team shot up that thar BEAR BEAST and the Lizard Demon......
DeleteWILD BILL put some heat down range on tham critters
JEFF be the brain trust fer tham AIMS team!
DeleteGRAYs making hybrides bigfoot is a hybrid!
ReplyDeleteas well as humans 2.0 are hybrids!
Ha ha ha ha!! The adrenaline comment yesterday was up there with cloaking malfunction.
Deletewheres me AK, shots tham cryptid critters for sure
ReplyDeleteAKs for all your aliens GRAYs needs
Deletelike old MARINE WILD BILL say lets put some heat on tham.
DeleteNo! poor some more BS on that!
DeleteDude Wild Bill ahuntin BEAR in raleigh county! he knows all tham hollows fer shure
DeleteWILD BILL abin a BEAR HUNTER and trap builder and was a Marine!
Deletedang Wild Bill done it all...
DeleteTrapper said he was a key player on the AIMS team
Need a body to end this debate, all the other evidence is useless or circumstantial. It's interesting but not conclusive, if it were, this wouldn't be a fringe topic.
ReplyDeleteobama say the debate is over -
Deleteconstitution that was some time AGO!
executive orders the NEW NORM
Trapper and team needed more firepower when the Cajun Kraklin's giant tentacles came up out of the swamp.
ReplyDeleteWHERE'S HUCKLEBERRY ?
fer shure trade them shotguns in for AKs lot of follow up shots
DeleteTrapper homed in on the skills for the AIMS team -
ReplyDeleteBUCK @ point
WILD BILL @ trap maker
WILLY @ trap maker
HUCKELBERRY @ the team 6
JEFF @ the tech guru and research cryptids
TRAPPERS A team