History can and will repeat itself: Will the Ketchum DNA Study show the world the proof of Sasquatch?


Editor’s Note: This is a post by Bigfoot Evidence contributor, Damian Bravo, a Sasquatch believer. You can join Damian's group Sasquatch Lives? on Facebook and the group's official page at www.sasquatchlives.com.

In 2006, Hwang Woo-suk, just like Melba Ketchum a veterinarian, as well as also being a stem cell researcher was charged with bioethics law violations. He initially became famous because two of his research papers were published in the journal “Science” in 2004 and 2005. Dr. Woo-Suk’s research claimed that he had successfully created human embryonic stem cells by cloning. Turns out that the specific stem cell research he purported to have made achievements was totally fabricated, with false information (in basic term, a hoax). Additionally, at the same time that his claims were found to be manufactured, he was also charged with embezzlement.

In his early years as a researcher, Dr. Woo-suk also claimed the cloning of a series of cows; he was never able to prove his experiments empirically by showing factual scientific verifiable data as proof of the process of how he was able to achieve the cloning. His work was seen by many just as ambiguous as the DNA research of Dr. Ketchum today who is currently making claims that the DNA will prove Bigfoot.

In February 2004, Hwang’s team announced that they had successfully created an embryonic stem cell with the somatic cell nuclear transfer method; this paper was published in the March 12 issue of Science. Hwang had established himself as an expert in animal cloning and secured celebrity status in South Korea by the late 90s. His alleged sudden success was surprising because it was the first reported success in human somatic cell cloning. Until Hwang's claim, it was agreed by many respected scientist that because of the complexity of primates, creating a human stem cell by cloning was next to impossible.

It is interesting that many believe that a scientist could try to create false information to have a paper published and at the same time believe whole heartily that a DNA study cannot be tainted by the players involved. Mind you, I am not saying that this is the case with the Ketchum DNA study, but it seems rather interesting that some parallels can be drawn between the Woo-suk incident in stem cell research and Dr. Ketchum’s DNA Study. For one, we have a study shrouded in secrecy, with its results not confirmed by any reputable journal. Two, just like Dr. Woo-suk and his stem cell findings, Dr. Ketchum appears to be making wild claims. She, like Woo-suk, has also not provided any type of scientific verifiable data to empirically show the progress of her findings, nor has the study been confirmed to be factual by any reputable scientific source.

I ask you, why are the names of the other scientists involved in the peer review a secret? Is it because they have no credibility as true scientist (or have never published a paper)? How can we know if the DNA study can be trusted when we do not even know who reviewed it and agreed with its findings? Will knowing the information jeopardize the sanctity of the study, for that matter?

There are many questions without answers. In Dr. Woo-suk’s case on December 29, 2005, the Seoul National University determined that all of Hwang's stem cell lines were fabricated. Later on January 10, 2006, the Seoul National University announced, Dr. Woo-suk’s 2004 and 2005 papers on Science were both fabricated. On January 11th, following on the confirmation of scientific misconduct and embezzlement, the journal Science retracted both of Hwang's papers on unconditional terms denouncing his inappropriate falsifications of research data.

Hwang held a press conference on January 12, 2006, and publicly apologized for the entire fiasco, but in the end, did not admit to cheating. Instead, if we use Guy Edwards’s five stages of releasing Bigfoot findings of evidence, Dr. Woo-suk fell in “Stage Five” and explicitly put the blame on other members of his research project team for having deceived him with false data and alleged a conspiracy. He stated that, “my projects had been sabotaged and that there was theft of the materials involved. My cloning human stem cells was possible and the technology to do it”, and if he were given six more months he could prove it. This was an extension of the "ten days" he earlier said he needed to re-create the stem cells; he originally had asked "ten days" back on December 16, 2005. That year Seoul prosecutors raided his home searching for files and evidence to start a "criminal investigation" of Hwang. This led to a two year suspended sentence for wrong doings in 2009 and as CNN reported that in 2006 Dr. Woo-suk had admitted conjuring fake findings to get his paper published.

Recently, questions have surfaced about Dr. Ketchum’s reports from the BBB in Texas, which has graded her DNA business with an “F” status on handling of various types of customer services, which in many cases have not been resolved. It would be unfair to categorize this information as proof of true wrong doing, but reports from other DNA labs do not show these issues. Dr. Ketchum in many ways, whether she likes to admit it or not, has become a celebrity of sorts in the Bigfoot world, just like Dr. Woo-suk was a national celebrity at a more extreme level in his home country of Korea. The good Doctor cannot say she does not enjoy what this DNA study has created for her in the DNA business world and possibly, the realm of scientific history.

I want to clarify that although Dr. Woo-suk case led to an uncomfortable legal situation for his stem cell research, in no way do I suggest this will also be the outcome for the Ketchum’s DNA study. But in a world where so many of us think that everyone has the best of intentions, it does not mean that the people around us have our same high sense of integrity and ideals to achieve their ultimate goals. We have heard all kinds of incredible statements from individuals in Dr. Ketchum’s camp, as well as other supposedly habituators. They believe Bigfoots have telepathic capabilities, can phase through dimensions and even ride on UFO’s.

As we get closer to May and the rumors mill flies around that when and if the DNA results will be published, we will hopefully get the proof showing factual scientific verifiable data to confirm the existence is Bigfoot. Or perhaps, history will repeat itself and just like Dr. Woo-suk, Dr. Melba Ketchum will have to use Guy Edwards from the Bigfoot Lunch Club site Five Stages of releasing Bigfoot evidence and will fall into Stage Five and say she was also hoaxed by the people around her.

As a believer in the existence of Bigfoot, I want to hold on to my romantic view of what these creatures could possibly be. Will the DNA study and other proofs be enough? Or will those that are searching for the truth have to wait another 4 decades to see this creature alive? Will we eventually see the old guards of the Bigfoot world pass the torch to the new generation of believers and fade away with the bitter dream of never finding the creature that has haunted many of them from the very moment they had a sighting? In the end, I wish the best for all involved and hope that what they are doing is with the best intentions in the world. Yet, I do it cautiously using the case of Dr. Woo-suk and his stem cell research as an example for being pragmatic and hope that all that believe do the same. Good intentions can at times go awry-- history has proven this.

Damian Bravo

Contributing writer:

bigfootevidence.blogspot.com
www.sasquatchlives.com

Guy Edwards' 5 Stages of Big Bigfoot Announcement:

Comments

  1. Best article on this situation I've seen so far. it reeks of suspicion due to the secrecy and wild claims.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Too bad it's full of holes like the Ketchum camp believing in UFOs or dimensions phasing. What utter nonsense, they make it very clear this is a real flesh and blood species of this Earth and distancing themselves from any such fantasies. It's wild unbased claims by Bravo. Won't stop the study of course, only make the outcome more satisfying for everyone.

      Delete
    2. they make those claims because of the person that Melba put in charge of the protection program. that individual believes all kinds of wild things about bigfoot.

      Delete
    3. That's ridiculous. Just because Arla believes something that doesn't mean Ketchum does too. You can put someone in charge of a protection group because you think they'd be good for that job, but that doesn't mean that person's beliefs reflect that of the entire group. Do you hold the same beliefs as your employer?

      Delete
    4. So? Still nothing about UFOs, etc. You need to understand, that if alive they're probably social beings and have all sorts of daily activities besides eating berries.

      Delete
    5. Isnt she the LouBob of the Ammi habituation fiasco several years ago on the BFF? Where bigfoot was everywhere and "zapping" them

      Delete
    6. I doubt any of us replying here will have enough genetics education to understand the Ketchum DNA study when it does come out. The field of DNA research is still a young one, with newer methods and equipment constantly allowing information that wasn't available only a short time before. This will only be the first regarding sasquatch. Something made this DNA that is different than anything we know. They'll have to dumb it down for those of us who don't have professional expertise in the field. This will allow most everybody to make opinions for and against, without really understanding the facts, not to mention the same behavior before the study comes out. At the very least, it'll allow more resources to be made available at the university level. It's not a one and done yes/no study. It'll open doors, allow for the possibility, and it'll be fun. Our left brain dominant waking state, is just having trouble understanding and dealing with the possibility of a creature that uses its brain in a totally different way, with heightened senses and awareness, much like a blind person, and that we can't seem to catch one. Our left brains are frustrated, perhaps this study will help them cope. The sasquatches are coping just fine, and they can catch us any time they want.

      Delete
    7. Well, their nightly activity consists of taking massive dumps in the woods that hurt so bad that it makes them "call blast". When it hurts really bad the will grab large sticks and hit trees until the pain subsides.

      My trail cam filmed this but I am not going to release this because I am fearful of ridicule.

      Delete
    8. @7:08 Speak for yourself. I know enough about DNA to recognize bullshit when I see it. And what's your basis for the claims about Bigfoot's brain?

      If you're going to pretend Ketchum is a scientist, at least work at it and don't fall into assuming facts not in evidence.

      Delete
    9. One more observation that I picked up on my trail cams is that they spend most of the day eating deer bones and tree bark. One reason that they are seen at night is because they are trying to walk off the digestive pains before their bowl movements kick in. Sort of like trying to walk off gas pains.

      I have the video of this and was planning on sending it to MK Davis for analysis.

      Delete
    10. That is exactly why the BBB exists. If you dont know what you are dealing with you at least understand the person. Melba has a lot of work to do to prove her claims. If she did see a family of 5 bigfoots I wouldnt doubt if they had a claim against her with the BBB.

      Delete
    11. @7:27...It's just a doubt I have, Rest easy though, we'll look forward to your already predjudiced opinion on Ketchum's DNA study. the basis for my statements (of opinioin) on sasquatch brain/mind functioning is that they don't use writing, make complex tools, and seem to not need them. So what are they using that works so well for them? If they're a different species or even a sapien offshoot, its going to be different. Even humans have these right brain or even whole brain functioning modes. Take dreaming, a totally different mode of mental functioning, that can be developed to a much greater degree given the proper training and cultural support. (Tibetan Dream Yoga, Aboriginal Dreamtime) And it can be used to confer upon one a greater ability to survive ones environment. Take the autistic human, with narrow windows of abilities so astounding, they wouldn't be believed, if not witnessed. In terms of evolutionary biology, it would be surprising if nature didn't make the sasquatch experiment. Most hominid and sapien experiments didn't make it. We did (for now anyway). It seems the sasquatch experiment was also a success. Being bigger, faster, and stronger than sapien sapiens, was a good strategy, we couldn't catch 'em and kill 'em, like all the others. That their brains work different, is a given. My personal opinion on this is a general statement, not fact. A left brained extrapolation, but with perhaps some right brained intuitive insight. I'm guessing the sasquatch's have awareness abilites that have largly gone dormant in modern humans, but not all. Native Americans, or the "First Nations" peoples have kept these traditions and abilities alive, as have many others. Ketchum is not doing this on her own, btw, and I don't know your defination of a "scientist". If one gets to the truth, does that qualify? We'll see what we see when the study comes out. We already know from one finger of a Denisovan, that their DNA is present in many east asians, that neanderthal's is present in most europeans, to one degree or another. With the emerging field of genetics, we're just starting to understand nature's unending hominid experiments. Sasquatch's part is particularly interesting to us/me, because they're so good at avoiding us. humans can only avoid humans for so long. But, these guys are good, really good. I'm guessing again here, but, this must have been developed during the megafauna era, where the predators were perhaps as big, fast, and strong, as they are, or more so. Having a larger sapien type processor, and using it more in a right brain/whole brain mode, would confer upon them a greater ability to survive. Perhaps they can't make tools like us and were forced to specialise in a different, but obviously functionally superior way. This is just the first of many sasquatch dna studies, remember. Get your PHD in genetics, join the fray. It's wide open. I'm 58 now, have my degrees, just not in the biological sciences. But, if I could do it over....

      Delete
    12. Good post. We need more like this. You know what is funny about all of this is that we keep talking "mainstream science this and mainstream science that", take a moment and look at all of the actual scientists and people with degrees that are actually interested in this field and believe that there could be a real undiscovered primate in North America. Seems to me that science has already accepted this, just not everyone that is a scientist.

      Delete
    13. Excellent, well-composed post!! I also wish we had more like it on this site.

      Delete
    14. "@7:08 Speak for yourself. I know enough about DNA to recognize bullshit when I see it. And what's your basis for the claims about Bigfoot's brain?

      If you're going to pretend Ketchum is a scientist, at least work at it and don't fall into assuming facts not in evidence."

      hmmm I call BULLSHIT!!!! "pretend Ketchum is a scientist?" and telling that guy to "speak for him self." about the fact that most of us here are not DNA experts?.. ROFLMAO

      Okay for one, Ketchum has "Dr." at the beginning of her name.. All I see is "Anonymous" for you. And you sure as hell did not back up your own claims before deciding to attack others. So you are a DNA expert? I call BULLSHIT! All you are is a typical coward who wants to attack others for expressing their opinion. This is why you remain nameless.

      Now... DAMIAN? How the hell do you have the audacity to attack Ketchum by trying to compare her to Woo-Suk? I mean YOU of all people??? You were just called a hoaxer all over youtube. And you want to put others through that?.

      "I'm not saying that this is the case for Ketchum"... No, you are or why else say it at all. That whole wall of text was you comparing Ketchum to Woo-Suk. Took me a while to see this.. but you are bitch. I mean that is just who you are.. You attack people then you pull back and then play innocent as if you are the victim.. You did this with Hovey and you did this with Fasano. Only Fasano played your own game against you and that in it's self is just sad.

      Then you say things like how Fasano may have known you would see his hoax attempt because of your military training? And you just singlehandedly made everyone who served and is serving feel embarrassed. Only three kinds of people say that. #1 Cherries #2 Reservists/Guard. #3 Liars who have never been in the military. Which are you?

      Perhaps you should Change your name to 8-up Damian Bravo-Foxtrot?

      Delete
    15. @ Tzieth,

      Dude, take a beta-blocker. You're going to have a heart attack.

      Why should we trust Ketchum? She's been claiming to have a paper for how long now? It's been coming out "soon" for how long now?

      Yep, she's absolutely trustworthy. How do I donate to her "research?"

      Delete
    16. Well, you don't. Not once, not one single time has it ever been implied or hinted or outright asked for there to be donations to ANYTHING from Dr. Ketchum or anyone closely related to the study. I've seen this bullshit claim so many times, but not ONCE has the paper been attached to fundraising by the principals.

      Delete
    17. @AnonymousMonday, April 30, 2012 1:20:00 PM

      First off, Ketchums was tight lipped about the paper from the start. It wasn't as if she broadcasted it for publicity the way Hovey did with that pic. In this case it was first leaked by Robert Lindsay and then twisted to where she had to address the facts from the fiction. Basically what she is doing and when it is to be released was none of our business. She would have rather had it all done before it was even known about. Then she fired or broke ties with a bunch of people, possibly because they were Lindsay's informants, and then the same people started the attacks on her and here we are.

      Now we have all these Anoms popping in claiming to be geneticists and stating how DNA won't prove anything? I know nothing about this science so I really can't argue the point. But my field was in Law Enforcement. And in this case, DNA can condemn or exonerate on the individual level. So if you can target an individual why not a whole species with individual included? This won't prove it?

      Now you have those who say that there is no body to base it on... I fail to see why a body is needed if you have DNA of a separate species and enough of it to even clarify that there are multiple individuals from each sample. But what no one is saying is that there is a likely possibility that we do have the Bodies to base it on. We know that we existed concurrent with at least Five hominids. If what she has matches one of those then that is a killshot.

      But though I find these self proclaimed Anom-geneticists annoying, giving me a "heart-attack" lol It's the "Sasquatch Researchers" that keep attacking the work of other researchers that pisses me off the most. And it is always whoever the front runner is. They use such petty excuses to justify their actions such as "That researcher is wrong, it's not an ape" or "That researcher is wrong it's not a Human" when the true reason is that they want to be first. The same exact thing happened with the discovery of the Gorilla.

      If Matt Moneymaker honestly believes Sasquatch use vehicular-homicide to kill deer, then who is anyone else to say he is wrong? At least that guy is out in the field. If Adrian Erickson claims to have habituated himself with them, who is anyone else to deny it? He was also trying to keep his project on the down low and is also a victim of Lindsay and his leaks.

      Then you have morons like Damian Bravo-Foxtrot jumping on the bandwagon, when he is the last person who should be doing this after what he just went through.

      I personally believe in the multiple Hominid theory. If one guy thinks it's an ape, leave him alone.. If one guy thinks it's a Hominid, leave him/her alone. If one guy thinks it's a Hybrid leave them alone. If one person claims they are space aliens that travel inter-dimensional and claim that they communicate telepathicaly and are only after our Marijuana and to save the invironment... errrm try really damned hard to leave them alone as well :/

      They could be all right if these are different things.

      The reasons given for these attacks are stupid in themselves. "Hovey is trying to get publicity for her book!!!" And?... Isn't money the ultimate goal of all of this? Hell wouldn't you do the same?

      Unless they are trying to profit from a hoax like Biscardi, people should concentrate on their own work and not anyone else's.

      Delete
  2. The BBB reports, some history with Biscardi and no holotype for her DNA study doesnt give me any confidence in Ketchum's project. I could be surprised but my expectations are very low.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also, she filed a patent in 2011 for a new process of evaluating domestic and wild animals' DNA for genetic diseases, paternity, etc.

      What better way to turn a profit and focus attention on her invention than to make outrageous claims to a gullible audience? I know I'd want my cat tested by the person who discovered Bigfoot.

      Delete
    2. Without a body in a box, this paper is worthless.

      Delete
    3. Her companies F rating by the Texas BBB doesn't tend to instill much confidence either.

      Delete
    4. DNA is a body, all you need today to prove a species. You can see their bodies later.

      Delete
    5. You can't see Bigfoot bodies. They're magical. Like Unicorns.

      Delete
    6. DNA isn't a body. It is a sequence of amino acids coding for certain characteristics in living creature. This paper (if it ever sees the light of day) will never prove the existence of a new species.

      Delete
    7. I'm tired of thinking again. This topic sucks and is lame. Is there really nothing else going on in this field besides all of this lame ass bantering that these two camps are doing? I hate to ask this but is Moneymaker the only one out doing anything?

      Delete
  3. Good grief, Damian! Do not ever pull the trigger and publish before a proofreader goes over your work! The MULTITUDE of misspellings, punctuation gaffes and contextual errors was a horrible distraction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Beat me to it. Damian's post was unreadable.

      Delete
    2. More like chaotic and dumb.

      Delete
    3. Attacking the grammar and not the substance, typical Bigfooter tactics. You people remind me of a certain political group.
      What about the basis of his argument? Attack that, if you can.

      Delete
    4. His argument was good, but his writing? Not so much.

      Delete
    5. Anon 7:05 -- "...typical Bigfooter tactics." WTF? I'm just asking to read a reasonably professional piece, and not have to stop to figure out what the hell he's saying.

      Delete
    6. His argument was not even good. It was his normal way of attacking people while leaving himself the option to later recant it if he needs to. You can't even compare the two claims.. On is "Look what I can do" the other is "Look what I have found".

      Even before Fasano started that smear campaign all over youtube along with the fake cop, Damian was pulling the same crap. Attacking Fasano then trying to play the victim after Fasano attacked back. Yes I defended him because Fasano was trying to say Damian was trying to hoax, when he did clearly say what he saw could have been a person. But in retrospect all Fasano was doing was playing Damians own game against him.

      Damian was in the wrong then but I chalked it up as a simple mistake... But now this??? He was not making a mistake, he was being himself... The Short-Bus version of Robert Lindsay.

      Delete
  4. Catch'em Woo and suk. How appropriate.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Did I miss something? Has the Ketchum report came out? If not, how could you pull the trigger with this article? To say that "you are not emplying" etc. that Ketchem's work isn't a hoax is crazy when you use a man as an example who was PROVEN a fraud by fabrication of information, falsehoods, etc. to compare her too.

    Let the report come out. Let the paper be published. If it is proven to be false, then attack and defame.

    If I repeatedly compare my children's daycare provided to another similar daycare provided who was shut down for child pornography then I go on to say...I'm not saying my children's day care provided is this way but.....Anyone who has a brain cell can read between the lines.

    Maybe she is a fraud, maybe not. Maybe she is a glory hound who is fabricating facts and making up evidence, maybe not. But, our scientific community has certain steps that must be taken to recognize research as valid. Until her paper is shot down or published, we should not be crucifying her just yet.

    I am not a fan of hers either way. I just hate to see this lady crucified for something that hasn't even came out yet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agree! That piece should have been labeled an EDITORIAL. Personally, I'd snuff it right now before more read it.

      Delete
    2. And if a daycare already has an F grade BBB report you dont even allow them the opportunity to prove themselves to you right?

      Delete
    3. She claimed she was communing with a family of 5 bigfoots that don't want their pictures taken. What more do you need?

      Delete
    4. The issue is Bravo making statements of fact regarding the contents of an unpublished paper, comparing her to a convicted criminal, as well statements such as, "The good Doctor cannot say she does not enjoy what this DNA study has created for her in the DNA business world...". This is shoddy and reckless reporting, not matter what side of the fence you're on regarding Ketchem.

      Delete
    5. What stage is attacking people asking legitimate questions of your outrageous claims?

      Delete
    6. Probably more than five Bigfoots out there, if she's seen that number so what.

      Delete
    7. If she can't back it up with evidence, her sighting amounts to fanciful claims and does little to establish credibility for her paper.

      Delete
    8. Stage 2, get defensive and act nasty to anyone putting forth legitimate questions.

      Delete
    9. Who cares about the stupid paper, show us the body!

      Delete
    10. How do we know there actually is a paper? Not just that it's in peer-review, but that it actually exists?

      Delete
    11. For those of you who state that this article is "about putting forth legitimate questions" How? Please enlighten my feeble mind.

      By comparing a paper that has yet to be published or information that we have yet to read with a fraud who hoaxed and scammed is "legitimate questions"?

      Please explain this.

      Quit using the grade school "because I said" or "getting nasty" and simply explain.

      If I use your quotes and compare them to someone who has proven to be a liar, a hoaxer, or a thief and essentially do a side by side comparison editorial and then attempt to cover my butt by saying that I'm not, only a feable minded person would believe that they are not. Regardless of the topic. Regardless of the person it is written about.

      Delete
    12. The Ketchum report has bee about to come out for almost two years now. Crawl back into the little hole that is your fantasy world.

      Delete
  6. Awesome article and mark my words.......This Ketchum DNA Study will mirror Dr. Woo-Suk's . The signs have been evident to anyone with an IQ above room temperature; BBB giving her business an F Grade, beliefs that Bigfoot braids her horses hair, that Bigfoot is paranormal/telepathic, claims that Bigfoot (nothing else) made stick structures, everything shrouded in secrecy, release dates continually being pushed back.

    Its all there for everyone to figure out but will they?

    I bet you dollars to doughnuts Ketchum blames everyone around her when this is exposed and blown up as a hoax/fraud.

    All I can say is: some people can't see the forest for the trees and they can't smell their own sh*t on their knees.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When you live with apes, man, it's hard to be clean... ;)
      David from the PAC/NW

      Delete
    2. Stage 5 of Guy Edward's 5 stages of a bigfoot announcement, is to claim; you are the one being hoaxed. Wait for it.....

      Delete
    3. if she claims to have been goaded by everyone around her, how will she explain the contact with the bigfoot family group. Will she admit she was duped by people wearing suits interacting with her? I look forward to hear that explanation!

      Delete
    4. I ment hoaxed by everyone. stupid auto correct.

      Delete
    5. It would surprise me if we ever get an explanation.

      Delete
    6. Get ready to be surprised then. LOL

      Delete
    7. Oh yes, get ready, to get ready, to be ready, for when the paper is ready to be released. It could be July 2010, or October 2010 or October 2011 or May 2012 or October 2012 or even sometime in 2013.

      Delete
    8. Oh yes, get ready, to get ready, to be ready for when the papers ready to be released. It could be July 2010, or October 2010, maybe October 2011 or even May 2012. It may even be October 2012 or possibly sometime in 2013. But, "get ready" for it. Its coming when its ready. Pffffftt.......

      Delete
    9. No..not 2013. The world will end in December 2012, that's how she is going to get out of it.

      Delete
    10. Step 1 of the Skoftic playbook: Put claims in the mouth of the one you are trying to discredit that have never been claimed by that person.

      Delete
  7. One arguement I hate is the one that goes "why would she pull a hoax and ruin her business?" To that I reply. What exactly did Joaquin Phoenix have to gain by telling the world he was quitting acting and going to become a rapper? He stayed in character for 2 whole years. He made little money on the film I'm still here. So if an A list actor can pull that off surely it is within the realm of possibility a veteranarian could do the same. J.D.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just like a bigfoot troll to compare an actor to a respected scientist.

      Delete
    2. And you can check the BBB about how respectable she is

      Delete
    3. A Cat Vet with a question grade on her business dealings, is not respectable to begin with.

      Delete
    4. Debate on the internet - I don't have a good counter-argument so I'll just call you names instead, as demonstrated by *Anonymous Apr 29, 2012 03:57 PM*

      There is nothing wrong with J.D.'s argument - he is pointing out that other respected professionals have risked and hoaxed before and provides an example of a respected professional. Morality and ethical behavior are personal traits, not functions of job title. The responder took the position that because Ketchum has a science background that somehow she is more ethical. Not relevant.

      Ketchum can have significant income increase once the study is released. If it was a hoax, it would have been in her best *interest* to release sooner so that she could maximize profit before independent review counters her results. Hoaxers and con-artists are lazy - they don't have the discipline to wait years for a favorable outcome. Since the study has been delayed multiple times, I don't think it's a hoax. There is simply no profit in delays and no evidence that she is hugely profiting now.

      This is a potential landmark case; the team would have been wise to hire a professional spokesperson to ensure chatter was minimized to case facts only. That didn't happen; case communication has not been poorly managed so incompetence is a fair target. But this is a business matter not a common component of scientific research. so I think it scores more so against her personal credibility and future ability to sway public opinion to her causes - don't hand detractors ammunition.

      Neither her communication errors, the size of the team, nor the prestige of the supporting university is relevant. The ONLY factors relevant to case status is the scientific rigor applied and that protocols were consistently performed and documented.

      I hope I'm around to QA the research study. In the case of the Korean doctor, fraud was determined AFTER the results were published and subjected to additional independent review as required by such a claim. This claim will almost certainly result in additional independent review too. At this point we can only speculate on wrong-doings; hiking would be far more productive.

      Incidentally, unless there is a raft of supporting evidence with the DNA, the DNA alone will not prove existence. But it could help secure grant funding for more research and that is likely the true intent of this study.

      David

      Delete
    5. No I don't like the argument.. It's apples to Oranges. Entertainers thrive off any publicity, positive or negative. look at Lindsy Lohan or Charlie Sheen. Because of their negative Publicity, their fame is catapulted. I guarantee if Mel Gibson was to make a new Lethal Weapon movie, or Mad Max movie, it would probably trump the past movies just because of his recent meltdown. And with Rappers the more negative the more they are "In".

      But in Science, if you are painted in a negative light, you are finished. Maybe Melba would get more people taking their pets to her for the novelty, but that is not going to make her rich nor ever respected again. If her paper and her research become a breakthrough, then her name will be immortalized. Actors have nothing to lose, researchers do.

      If Tom Biscardi ever actually does capture one, do you think anyone will even bother to check his claims? He would probably have to pay a scientist just to look at it after what he pulled. And if that scientist does find it to be a legit animal we would probably then face the problem of whether or not to even report it considering it's source. Any research he has ties with is even automatically considered suspect of fraud.
      This is what Ketchum and everyone associated with her faces if this paper turns out to either not exist, or if it is a fraud attempt. So I think the "Everything to lose" is a valid argument.

      Delete
    6. The Anon poster wrote: "Just like a bigfoot troll to compare an actor to a respected scientist." The implication being that scientists are somehow more ethical simply because they are scientists. Ethical behavior is a personal trait that has nothing to do with job title. ANYONE who commits fraud is at risk for losing their job and career. That *we* hold entertainers and athletes to a different standard is the failing of our society, not something inherit to their job title.

      Bad science happens a lot - there are limited research grant funds and people have cut corners and fudged numbers to get dollars. It's just that most scientists are not high profile so the general public rarely sees this. You know this is true - think of all the medications recalled because side effects killed people. Scientists cut corners in research to push products to market to maximize profit.

      I served on a bioethics committee in a teaching medical center. If all researchers were good and did the right thing, there would be no need for bioethics.

      But I'm also upset that you focused on only the top point of my position. What else did I say? That I didn't think it was a hoax and that communication incompetence <> research incompetence. If she messed up in research, it will either come out as a rejected study or after as additional independent review is a near certainty given the scope of the study claim. My point is pretty much your point - if she is guilty of wrongdoing she will pay for it.

      David

      Delete
  8. The point is that they do have people that can fool you initially but through scientific research he was caught they all are. So there is one guy in a thousand that tries to do this he is caught and pays the price. The system Works good !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All you have to rely on is her words. Is that good enough for you? If it is, why is it good enough? This is just a stranger that you don't know, claiming to have evidence that BF exists. Why would you trust her word?

      Delete
    2. Anom7:14

      Your Argument goes both ways. Right you do not know her, so why be so quick to discredit her? In either way, Time will Tell

      Delete
  9. I just dislike that these guys act like 10th graders in a crusade against the girl who has more popularity than them and who won't give them the time of day. After hearing his rants lately, I seriously think SWP(Merchant) HATES women.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely, pure boundless hatred. This is and has always been about hurt male pride not a damn thing else, they hate it to be beaten by a woman where this used to be a male playground for nerds. Go Melba, show these white trailer trash naysayers where it's at !

      Delete
    2. and you cant provide one example of what your saying

      Delete
    3. Oh dear Lord.....aren't you late for your feminist rally, Butch?

      Delete
    4. Melba Ketchum is the father I never knew

      Delete
    5. Hate to be beaten by a woman? You're funny, she can't even run a respectable DNA business. She's got an "F". Can't get any worse. This proves she's a giant joke in the scientific community. Now, Butch, get to your feminist demonstration where you belong.

      Delete
    6. This is the IRS, move your trailer it's over-parked.

      Delete
    7. This is Gillette, we have a special on razor's. They'll be great for removing Buckwheat from your armpits, Butch. Sorry, we can't help with your wardrobe of flannels.

      Delete
    8. I think he hates bad science and hoaxes, not women.

      Delete
    9. but if you are a female pseudo scientist hoaxer you shouldnt be treated different from Rick Dyer. Why is Melba not being treated like Dyer? That is unfair. She is a female that worked alot harder than Dyer and people dont recognize that yet. Melba should be bigger than Dyer.

      Delete
  10. very good article and i do hope that good does come from all this waiting but im with SWP give th DNA to me 6 to 8 hundred lbs at a lick and put it in a box i dont want it killed but i do want one standing in front of me in a cage (a well built cage) get what we need and turn it back to the wild where it should be

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A human in a cage? Only place you'll find that is in prison, which is probably where you'll end up if you harm one anyway.

      Delete
    2. that is the biggest bs I've heard. If you shot and killed one the chances of being charged for murder a pretty much nil. That's just one of the many excuses used by people telling stories, but don't want to back up their claims.

      Delete
    3. Agreed. A coffin or a cage. Then we can debate if it's human or not.

      Delete
    4. Yep, can't murder anything not known to science. Besides, "it made an aggressive move towards me and I had to defend myself.". However, I don't think its ever going to happen anyway. Just watch, this whole study is going nowhere. Its going to be a circus in the real scientific community.

      Delete
    5. If shooting a bigfoot would put you in Jail, why is Justin still free? Your argument fails. No one is going to prison for killing a bigfoot. If it ever happens.

      Delete
    6. why isn't he in jail? cause he didn't kill one.

      Delete
    7. Wrong troll. He'll be charged when we know what it is and so would you.

      Delete
    8. Wrong troll. How can he be charged with killing something that doesn't exist?

      Delete
    9. You CAN be charged with killing an "unlisted" animal. ANY animal! If you don't have license to kill it... You cannot legally kill it. The statutes are soft (varies by state) and in some cases, only a misdemeanor. Also, the corpse would be confiscated... and would exist when you are charged. Killing something that you didn't think existed is admitting that you did not properly identify a legal species.
      If tests on the confiscated cadaver showed it to be human (and the courts wanted to set a precedent)... There is no statute of limitation on homicide. As long as they didn't already convict you of the crime.
      David from the PAC/NW

      Delete
    10. Yep... If this took place in the next County over from mine, he would be in Jail. That county has Saquatch protection laws. But the main reason for that law was more to protect people from hunters out to kill a sasquatch then to actually protect a sasquatch it's self. Justin's own claim of how it happened being a prime example. He stated several times how it/they looked human, yet he shot it anyway without ever being sure what he was shooting at. Had that happened here, he would be in jail for sure.

      Delete
  11. Personally I'm tired of hearing about the DNA study. All I ever hear is "soon" and "sooner than later". Those few words get on my nerves, yet it makes me laugh. Maybe someone involved with the DNA study should look up the definition of "soon". Perhaps the folks should have said "sooner or later" because that appears to fit more appropriately.
    I'm not really on topic, I just had a rant that needed out.
    I had been cautiously optimistic, now I'm cautious.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe our hopes for proving Bigfoot lies elsewhere.

      Delete
    2. Man, I am with you. This garbage has run it's course. I'd love to see some new eyewitness accounts posted or just anything besides all of this back n forth crap.

      Sometimes I think this stuff is posted because certain folks are entertained by the fighting that goes on here over it.

      Delete
    3. The only proof anyone is interested in; is one in a box.

      Delete
    4. the only proof that anyone is interested in is whatever they can get right now.

      Delete
    5. Forget the box. You wouldn't believe it anyway because you'd still see that thing on TV just like Dyer's box, why don't you admit it to yourself. Hence, video of live Sasquatches ought to be preferable. And it is, you and all the other kooky SWPs out there need to grasp that.

      Delete
  12. The paper is due out soon, very soon. You naysayers will see. Finally proof that Bigfoot is the son of Cain, a star seed, the second coming, telepathically in communication with Rainbow children, and those in vibrationary alinement with the third world. Just in time for 2012.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't forget he is also Gozer the Gozerian. He will come in one of the many forms that are chosen.

      Delete
    2. Many Skeptics and Zuuls will know what it is to be roasted in the depths of a Sasquatch that day, I can tell you!

      Delete
    3. FINALLY, some people who know what it's all about. Get ready because Bigfoot is about to consume your life along with the rest of society. It's wrath will be unleashed and when you feel it, you'll wish you had never wondered about their existence. It's coming, soon, very, very soon. Sooner than you think. It won't be later, it will definitely be sooner.

      Delete
    4. It takes less than 2 minutes to make popcorn. Calm down dude.

      Delete
  13. Poorly written, illogical, full of innuendo and a total embarrasment to the author. Anyone who believes this is a good article just scored an F-. You can drive a truck through the holes in this poor attempt at an arguement to draw a parallel between the two cases.

    Do you really think that the clearly many people and multiple institutions involved in this are all party to a huge misrepresentation and concoction of data? NO ONE here knows anything about the details of her research or how it was checked by independent sources. So we are left with speculation built on speculation by those who do not seem to realise that they are displaying their own complete lack of critical thinking, and in a field where they have no knowledge.

    This article is a monumental FAIL. Goebbels would have been proud of this "logic". If you do not think deeply about a topic, I guess you will accept any old tripe that is dished up that cobbles disparate facts together in a work of fiction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An organisation not without it's own severe critics of "Pay to Play" behaviour. I wouldn't hang my hat on what they say.

      Delete
    2. Well said Nero. Seems like Bravo's just another impatient train hopper jumping on Ketchum because it's popular in certain circles and they can have this feel-good camaraderie, lots of those about lately. Hey kooky scouts, got any stick structure pics too ?

      Delete
    3. poor nero. bless his heart

      Delete
    4. Nero, you're assuming that there are "Multiple institutions" involved. Do you have proof of this?

      Quit playing your fiddle while the Hoax burns on.

      Delete
    5. Proof? I guess he can read unlike some. Duh!

      Delete
    6. I've read that. I've also read emails claiming that for $99.99, I can add an extra 6 inches to my 9 inch dick. Do you fall for those emails, too?

      Delete
    7. My wife read those same emails it only adds 1/2 of what they claim, dont fall for it because it is painful. I can hardly walk right now..

      Delete
  14. Bigfoot is from outer space. The get dropped off on earth to referee the alien vs predator battles.

    ReplyDelete
  15. What is needed here Shawn is an article by an genetics expert who explains how you demostrate a new species from DNA analysis and how reliable that is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That person does not exist. Its never been done for any class of animal. Biochemistry is not that advanced. It would be a paper unto itself, demonstrating how to establish a species on DNA alone. Not enough is known about genetics; a paper gets published whenever a single gene is described. With denisova they had enough bone for experts to declare it came from something in the homo genus. The comparative DNA study showed it was not homo sapien.
      Tony

      Delete
  16. "Just another tool from teamtazerbigfoot"
    Cmon damon tell us about your bigfoot sighting the first time you were ever in the forest.Dont forget, it stood up , turned and ran..Show us your video, youn phony

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bravo was in the military I doubt that was his first time in a forest

      Delete
    2. Wow! Rick or maybe is Fasano his skirt boy you need to come up with something new, everytime you post the same thing about the same subject. I guess when you have the mind of a moronic bafoon rational thinking is impossible.

      Delete
    3. The bleebers are freakin' out over this shit. Denial can be an ugly, yet amusing thing.

      Delete
  17. bigfoot loves you, and everyone else thinks youre an a$$hole...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You got it all wrong, Bigfoot wants to kill you and eat your offspring.

      Delete
    2. Raw. They don't use fire.

      Delete
    3. Don't forget, Marble Mountain Sasquatch had a fire pit. It was freshly made to and hadn't been used just yet.

      Delete
    4. If bigfoot had one of those green egg smokers I think he would use it a lot.

      Delete
  18. So who is this bull dyke hog anyways? Earth to bull dyke hog put tinfoil over your head then they can not read your mind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You sir, are a cruel juvenile that desperately needs to take a lesson in civility. One can disagree with someone without spewing personal attacks.

      Delete
  19. Where is the paper crybabies? THERE IS NO PAPAER!!
    Deal with it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. everyone seems to like busting on ketchum's credentials. what exactly are damian bravo's credentials? he says he is an expert does he have a degree from any reputable institution or is he as full of crap as biscardi,moneywanker and snowfairy prime?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bravo isn't claiming to have scientific evidence of Bigfoot's existence. And he hasn't been teasing people for two years with the promise of said proof. Sooooooooon.

      Delete
  21. Look guys, I can't reveal too much to on here right now, but there are just a few last minute loose ends that need to be tied up but I assure you that the paper is finished and on it's way. Just sit tight for a little longer and I promise none of you will be disappointed. Not even SWP.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. See, the paper is real and it's about to be published. I can hardly wait. You haters are so wrong. Melba Ketchum is a top scientist and you will find that out.

      Delete
    2. Pffft, you mean soon, like, July 2010? That soon? Mark my words, there will still be questions regarding Bigfoots existence by mainstream science after this paper is released. What that means is, this will in the end be a failure, because in the end, the goal of it was to prove their existence once and for all. Book it! Failure!

      Delete
    3. Mainstream science WILL NOT accept her evidence, nor can it be published in a respected journal because she can't prove chain of possession. Furthermore, all samples would have to be in the current and permanent possession of an accredited museum or university. Pretty simple rules if you want to be legit. End of story.

      Delete
    4. You are wrong. Don't forget that giganto was proven to be a legit species just from teeth and jaw bone fragments. The evidence that is being presented in this project is actually a lot better. Also, where do you get that the evidence has to be in permanent possession of a museum or university? Why don't you take a moment to post these "simple" rules of yours and where you dug them up from instead of just making statements?

      Delete
    5. The Ketchum study IS mainstream science.

      Delete
  22. OK, I'm willing to admit that our research group had faith that Ketchum would prove that Sasquatch are real, but we have come to the conclusion that she has failed and failed miserably.
    I do still have faith in the massive amount of evidence that shows that these creatures exist and the conclusive proof that our group has obtained. The truth will come out, soon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why haven't you released this "conclusive proof?"

      Delete
    2. Soon, we have scientists from five different universities working on a paper. We have the femur of a Sasquatch and a right middle finger, our study will leave Ketchum in the dust.

      Delete
    3. I doubt it would be hard to leave ketchum in the dust

      Delete
    4. Many will take credit for the discovery, not just one. This is a group effort and will be recognized as such.

      Delete
    5. So Bigfoot is giving all of science the bird? Nice.

      Delete
    6. If the hoax is a group effort they will turn on each other. It should be entertaining.

      Delete
    7. Truer words were never spoken, Anon 9:29.

      Delete
    8. and we should believe you and not ketchum, why is that?

      Delete
  23. Ketchum is going to fail and fail hard! When this is released and analyzed, MAINSTREAM science will NOT accept her paper as proof of Bigfoots existence. In the end, that's what she set out to but I guarantee you it will not happen. That means she failed, period. All you people thinking it was going to be a glorious victory are going to be let down hard. Guaranteed. We will still be looking for definitive proof after this paper is released, no question about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How do you even know there is a paper? You're just as foolish as the people that think she will be successful.

      Delete
    2. How do you know you have a dick? You can't see that either.

      Delete
    3. Come on douchebag, don't be a "complete" retard here. There will be a paper BUT its not going to be the CONCLUSIVE proof that all of her fanboys thought it was going to be.

      Delete
    4. THE ONLY WAY WE'LL HAVE DEFINITIVE PROOF IS IF WE OBTAIN A BODY! AND EVEN THEN, I STILL WON'T BELIEVE IT!
      I'll stop shouting now.

      Delete
    5. Of ocurse you wouldn't believe it, you're a religious nobody denying anything but God. Love the retarded comments here, not only will the Ketchum paper be out it'll conclusively prove this unknown humanlike species is real.

      Delete
  24. today I'm thinking about the small woman, again.

    ReplyDelete
  25. The whole Ketchum DNA study is turning into a three ring circus.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly. The only circus I see is the one being run by the constant detractors, who take every facebook post as some sort of personal affront.

      Delete
  26. If bigfoot really exist (or) existed. We would have known by now.

    Its that simple. Really.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^OF COURSE WE WOULD! WE ARE REALLY SMART! WE KNOW EVERYTHING THERE IS TO KNOW!
      I'll stop shouting now.

      Delete
  27. this guy is a troll and a total loser. I will be glad when the study is released so he can crawl back under the rock he came from. Hey damian you don't find bigfoot sitting at a computer desk. If you actually strapped it up and went out and studied instead of making moronic comparisons. You might actually get the respect your looking for. You won't get it like this

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow, just because Damian is asking true questions and doing a comparison on certain points of a event of a publish paper that turn out to be made falsified data now he is a troll, yet he is not accusing her of any wrong doing. He is talking about Dr. ketchums's actions, she has presented no evidence that her DNA study was done in a proper scientific manner, how can we trust research that we do not even know who are the actual people involved.

      I will ask the same questions like Damian, how would knowing who are the actual people that are true scientist and part of the of this, affect the validity of DNA Study.

      Makes you think that this was not done the proper way. If true scientist are part of this, who are they and what are the credentials they have which make them experts in this field of DNA indetification.

      Is that unreasonable to ask, so grow up Anon at 7:40. Your just mad that the paper will not prove anything.

      Delete
    2. @ DNA BLAAAAH! I bet it was difficult enough to sign on legitimate researchers to a BIGFOOT peer review. Assuming they are legitimate, and we don't know they are not, why expose them to scrutiny in advance of what is surely to follow publication?

      Delete
    3. Omelba is the 'one', you cannot question her methods or integrity. She will give us proof of Bigfoot that we can believe in.
      This is why we must attack the messenger and not the message. Sometimes you have to play dirty with those whom against you don't have a leg to stand on.

      Delete
    4. Because other Peer Review papers do not operate this way, Ketchum is making her own rules on how this process works. She and her P.R. have never clearly defined what type of peer review they are using. So no wonder why people do not agree or understand all the secrecy going on. She as the author of the paper should have explain what process she is using. below I outline 3 of them which are simplified for understanding by Wikipidea.

      Anonymous peer review

      Anonymous peer review, also called blind review, is a system of prepublication peer review of scientific articles or papers for journals or academic conferences by reviewers who are known to the journal editor or conference organizer but whose names are not given to the article's author. The reviewers do not know the author's identity, as any identifying information is stripped from the document before review. The system is intended to reduce or eliminate bias, although this has been challenged – for example Eugene Koonin, a senior investigator at the National Center for Biotechnology Information, asserts that the system has "well-known ills"[23] and advocates "open peer review". Others support blind reviewing because no research has suggested that the methodology may be harmful and the cost of facilitating such reviews is minimal.[24] Some experts proposed blind review procedures for reviewing controversial research topics.[25]

      Open peer review

      Main article: Open peer review

      Open peer review describes a scientific literature concept and process, central to which is the various transparency and disclosure of the identities of those reviewing scientific publications. The concept thus represents a departure from, and an alternative to, the incumbent anonymous peer review process, in which non-disclosure of these identities toward the public – and toward the authors of the work under review – is default practice. The open peer review concept appears to constitute a response to modern criticisms of the incumbent system; therefore, its emergence may be partially attributed to these phenomena.

      Postpublication reviews

      The process of peer review does not end after a paper completes the peer review process. After being put to press, and after 'the ink is dry', the process of peer review continues as publications are read. Readers will often send letters to the editor of a journal, or correspond with the editor via an on-line journal club. In this way, all 'peers' may offer review and critique of published literature. A variation on this theme is open peer commentary; journals using this process solicit and publish non-anonymous commentaries on the "target paper" together with the paper, and with original authors' reply as a matter of course. The introduction of the "epub ahead of print" practice in many journals has made possible the simultaneous publication of unsolicited letters to the editor together with the original paper in the print issue.

      I think if this would have been explained and re-enforced from the start,the general public, researchers and other scientist would have been more understanding and receptive of the study. Now keeping in mind that these outlines are not overseen by any outside sources or court of ethics.

      Delete
    5. @11:01 is half right. We can't question Melba's methods, because she refuses to reveal the methodology of her study. However, I can and do question both the manner in which she collected samples and her integrity, both as a person and as a scientist. Lying to customers, failing to perform services for payment rendered, and being rude to customers who have the temerity to ask why they haven't gotten results after six months does not speak well of a person's personal integrity. What has leaked about her study causes me to question her scientific integrity, as well. It is not scientific to claim that bigfoot is the product of angels mating with humans, ancient aliens, and interdimensional beings. It isn't even scientific to claim that Bigfoot exists without a holotype with a properly documented origin. Melba's request for samples fails to a) provide a reliable holotype, and b) fails to properly document the origins of the samples. I'd be amazed if any of the samples weren't so contaminated as to be useless.

      Delete
    6. Melba has never claimed any of that crap about ancient aliens, interdimensional beings, etc. Straw men the lot of them.

      Delete
  28. all people like damian are doing is trying force someone who is actually doing research into giving up information. He has none. and will only have any if somebody gives it to him. The people involved in the study could care less about people like damian bravo. What he thinks and the things he is allowed to write on this blog only damages any credibility that this sight might have. What happens when the paper comes out? I will tell you what happens. They still won't recognise you, or pay any attention to you. And you will try to become a suckass or even better a victim. It's really sad. You are making your bed. Sitting in front of a computer making accusations about things that you obviously know nothing about won't bring a conclusion to this any faster. if you really want to become a part of the real bigfoot community stop judging others and get off your ass and contribute. If you spent half the time doing actual research and not ridiculing or judging others people wouldn't think your such a joke!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Tim Fasano is that you, is interesting how everytime you write something is directed to Damian, and always mention he is behind a computer. I wonder where Damian has said he is out in the field looking for BF. I never seen him say he does in any of his articles or interviews. The probelm is Tim that your just angry he does more behind a computer on the search of BF then you do with your trail cam bull crap in a area of florida that is not even known in recent years to have Skunkape activity. I hope one day Damian does go out into the field, I believe he will make a grate scientist if he appield himself to a particular field of study it would not surprise me.

      Delete
  29. I don't think any of us would like to see a Sasquatch killed simply to prove their existence. I don't think any of us wants to see a Sasquatch behind bars in a zoo or any other facility.

    But the sad truth is. Unless one is hit by a vehicle and the body harvested. Or remains from a naturally occurring death or recovered. No Paper is going to prove existence to a degree that allows for immediate, widespread acceptance within the scientific community.

    I'm not Pro-kill. I'm not Pro-capture. But I guess I am Pro-specimen.
    The person that submits the article above is correct int that, because of other events. Particularly those like Hwang's. Her(Melba's) paper is going to be torn apart by others, in search mistakes and unsubstantiated claims. That is simply how the world works. For those that believe this paper is going to be a game changer. I really feel like you are going to be sorely, let down. Not because I believe Melba Ketchum is dishonest. I don't know her.
    But because the content of the paper is not going to be sufficient to those critical minds that will be looking at it so closely.

    In my mind. Without a doubt. The only way to prove the existence of Bigfoot is to produce a specimen.

    I'm sorry that bothers so many. But it is the cruel fact of life in this regard. JMHO

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not when you have DNA. We accept it in every other question, and this is not some weird ape rather another human possibly. There'll be video eventually to support, nobody wants to see any kills when it's so clearly not an animal we're talking about. Had it been that searchers would've found it decades ago.

      Delete
    2. right and researchers have located and comtacted unknown native groups in central America, etc but for some outlandish reason primatologist cant find squatch, other peoples cant either, hes an invisible flying alien monkey who disappears like a silent fart in a windstorm.

      Delete
    3. John Bamburg, I couldn't agree with you more. You are 100% correct.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous 02:13PM,
      not to burst your bubble, but..

      I wish that un-categorized DNA was enough. I wish that accompanying video would be enough. But the sad fact is. It isn't.

      The most simple explanation I can give is this. If your DNA was taken from in the woods. And there is no DNA on file anywhere to match yours. AND. If I have a video of you walking the woods
      to submit with the DNA.

      All I have is DNA that shows it to come from a human. All I have is a video showing a human. I still have nothing to show that the DNA came from the human in the video.

      I also have nothing to show that the human in the video is as they appear to be. It could be a human in a "fat suit" with theatrical makeup. I can't even prove that the human is, the human that the video supposes it to be.

      However, If I had the DNA and the actual human. I can scientifically connect the two and prove they exist and are one in the same.

      I hope that isn't a, too complicated line of thought to follow.

      Delete
    5. "Simply to prove their existance"????? There is nothing SIMPLE about proving the existance of a heretofore unknown, oversized primate that is alive and well right under our noses! The proof would change everything! It's atleast worth harvesting one! People please stop regurgitating what you have read or heard others say and form your own opinions. The supposed names of experts in the field know no more than anyone else. There are no experts.

      Delete
  30. No, it isnt too complicated. It's rather simple minded.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Please consider this. The video we have seen over the past fifty years is terrible. The P/G film being the best we have and its very debatable. Think about watching a sci-fi monster movie. The creatures are obviously fake, right? CGI looks real, but still lacks that genuine feel. Like the "Rise of The Planet of The Apes". The effects were all CGI. Now imagine trying to fool someone with closeup footage of a person in a costume. It would/could never fool anyone. Suppose now that someone, somehow got real footage of real sasquatch, both close up and far away. Not blurry, but clear and concise with a mediocre camera. Wouldnt that be very convincing? I dont buy the argument that vidoe would never prove their existance. I think it depends wholy on the QUALITY of the footage.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A video of a troop of Sasquatches hunting down and killing a deer would be pretty good

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BREAKING: Finding Bigfoot Production Company Seeks Filming Permit In Virginia