Melba Ketchum: Sasquatch DNA Project Update
Posted by: Craig Woolheater on December 3rd, 2011
Melba Ketchum has posted the following update on her Facebook wall this evening.
For all of the people speculating on the Erickson project, Adrian and I have agreed to set aside the NDA to tell you that his group is a successful participant in this project. His research project to obtain the DNA samples is separate from us. His samples will be in the paper along with all of the successful submitters. And, yes, his great footage will come out so lets let all of the rumors go, OK? And once again, please know that we are at the mercy of the journal as to when we can announce. Thanks!Melba Ketchum
Co-founder of Cryptomundo in 2005.
I have appeared in or contributed to the following TV programs, documentaries and films:
OLN's Mysterious Encounters: "Caddo Critter", Southern Fried Bigfoot, Travel Channel's Weird Travels: "Bigfoot", History Channel's MonsterQuest: "Swamp Stalker", The Wild Man of the Navidad, Destination America's Monsters and Mysteries in America: Texas Terror - Lake Worth Monster, Animal Planet's Finding Bigfoot: Return to Boggy Creek and Beast of the Bayou.
Heard from a reliable source connected with an article reviewer for Nature (a major science journal published in the UK) that the Ketchum paper was handed back (i.e. not *rejected*) for several reasons.
One of the reasons: The paper “does not contain a testable hypothesis”.
Not that the paper writers forgot to include something … It’s apparently more an issue of what is, and what is not, “testable” … and it’s a very technical matter that may not be resolved any time soon …
Supposedly that’s just one problem with the paper … There are more: The writers were very obviously “not zoologists” but they needed to be for a paper like this.
There is an undeniable silver-lining to this situation though: The paper was submitted to a major scientific journal and was under serious review by several top shelf scientists around the world. Hence, many elites of the scientific world are having serious discussions about the bigfoot/sasquatch topic for the very first time. Those elites are considering the issue of DNA trace evidence (from hair, blood, skin, etc.) sufficing as solid evidence to establish the existence of the species.
I do believe a wheel has been set in motion that was not in motion before. There’s a growing awareness among scientists that there is private funding available for a top-shelf, A-team effort to prove the existence of the species through DNA evidence. Thus, if Ketchum can’t produce a publishable journal paper about her own work, for whatever reason, there will be some highly qualified scientists who will be willing to jump in at this stage. IMO that was the threshold that needed to be crossed.
MM
Attention! We are announcing a future announcement! That is all.
Please, someone explain this to me, how did Biscardi get involved in this mess? My brain is seriously hurting from connection confusion, we’ve got Melba, the BF shooter, Richard, and Tom…. I’m trying to put this all together, who is involved with whom and I just can’t order it in my head.
We need a flow chart to follow this trainwreck.
I find it amusing Dr Ketchum comes out with this statement after the bigfoot prime stake debacle.
Academic peer review and the process call for patience. The full evaluation of evidence in the making of a decision demands of all of us to calmly wait. Judgments made on partial release of data does not benefit the serious study of hominology, anthropology, cryptozoology, or zoology.
Granted Loren, I think by in large the community and especially the participants have been patient and are continuing to to be so. How or what the Erickson Project story break was about or why isn’t transparent to this internet reader. And the FB page of little consequence I am sure to the process of peer review.
But, the Sierra Kills story is compelling. If for no other reason than the absence of comment by Dr. Ketchum and the voluminous apparent comments by Olympic Project and Justin Smeja about the event, now over a year ago. My personal opinion perhaps at odds with many, that disclosure, yeah or nay, to that controversial story is long overdue.
In response to Loren…bla bla bla..
show me the beef or go home..
so tired of having the proverbial sunshine blown up my arse i could puke..
Very true Loren. However, I feel that in light of the subject matter here, such long, drawn out waiting times are only bringing increased skepticism to a topic which needs anything but. The types of claims made by those involved with the Erickson Project are not being substantiated by a handful of black and white photos of a Ball of fur……If we are to be patient for much longer I highly suggest that those involved give us a better look at something to keep the interest in their “soon to be released” film. Lest it join the pile of other such “non conclusive” releases.
@ terry the censor
+1
talk about anti-climatic..
I agree with Mr. Coleman. New discoveries like this do take time.
As far as I know, the “giant” skeletons found at Tell-es Sa’idiyeh near the Levant still have a journal article in the wings despite having been found I think in the 80’s. These skeletons I have heard have measured anywhere from over 6 feet to 7 feet (including two female skeletons around 7 feet high), found among an average of 5’3 or so, dating to the 12th century BC, and are possibly the remains of the Biblical Rephaim peoples. (Dr Johnathan Tubb is the excavator who found them. They thought at first with one find they found cow remains, until the legs connected to a human pelvis).
Likewise Giganotosaurus was found years before it became famous.
And then there is a scientist (Professor Jeffery Scwartz) at the Carnegie Museum of Natural History in Pittsburgh that is working on a replacement for Darwin’s theory that is not faith based (he is an agnostic, which is fitting since Darwin was too). The idea is that evolution can occur within one generation, due to a sleeper mutation, which lurks in a population of species until two parents carrying the gene necessary for the change have offspring. That will be a long way off in the wings.
Perhaps Mr.Moneymaker is right about the setting of wheels into motion here. Even if things don’t go as planned this time around, now there will certainly be more attention from the scientific community. I just hope that such attention ends up being fruitful and not a final condemning of the idea as a whole.
I’d love to proven wrong but I still say this entire thing is one big crock and reeks of hoax. I am not buying any of it.
Greetings,
This is a situation where MM and Loren are correct. My feeling is the same as MM’s. The entire situation has caused a review and discussion at levels where the subject hasn’t been addressed before and may very well lead to further advances.
However, Even if Justin’s actions are found valid and credible and Melba’s analysis is upheld it will not change the long range requirement that a specimen living or dead must be presented to science before the species will be accepted and classified.
High resolution photos can help and are useful for identification and location of specimens. It seems the TBRC is now out for a collection of a specimen by force along with Chester Moore. It seems that shooting one even if the DNA is human will be quasi-approved by the authorities until they’re accepted as a species.
I don’t approve of it but my approval is not required and I’m in a minority on this one.
There does appear to be a lot of action going on in the government behind the scenes. The most likely reason for this is the Wood Products Industry represents 7% of our GDP. The finding of the species will dictate some changes and they seem to be in the process of insuring those changes won’t bother their business models.
If I owned stock in the companies or worked in them I might be highly tempted to be involved but I’m not. Let the research go on until we find the truth and it’s in the woods somewhere. My best,
@Airforce –
You make an incredible statement in your post:
“It seems that shooting one even if the DNA is human will be quasi-approved by the authorities until they’re accepted as a species.”
On who or what do you base this opinion? “Quasi-approved by the authorities” is a very big assumption, unless you know something we don’t?
What authorities?
Thanks in advance, nice post BBTY
Debating the legal aspects of a Bigfoot kill might be getting off topic. Regan Lee and I had a little discussion about it recently if anyone is interested. (My non-expert position is that existing law probably protects Bigfoot.)
@terry the censor
LOL – Living up to your name! If you are a site moderator I want to be clear, I wasn’t desiring a debate, rather simply the sources of that view….
did Airforce arrive at her/his conclusion based on information from a primary source, such as an authority or player in the event, or was it a conclusion arrived at more generally through reading secondary sources?
No debate, just a question.
Thanks Airforce in advance for answering and also Terry Censor for posting..