'Bigfoot' DNA sequenced in upcoming genetics study

Originally posted by Druscilla

That's quite disappointing.
If it's true that she's throwing around descriptors like "angel DNA", she's essentially ended her career in Science.

Well, she never had a "career in science" to begin with (or, should I say that could be "ended"). She's a veterinarian, not a scientist.

For what it's worth, she really was a former treasurer of the Association of Forensic DNA Analysts and Administrators as her bio claims:

AFDAA Past Officers

And she has published papers through the International Society for Animal Genetics (ISAG).

Uhhh,

This makes it a little more interesting, has this been posted? I am going to feel foolish if it has.

Looks like the release of Dr. Melba Ketchum's study is a year late.

Check me on this, but the dates seem pretty apparent...

rwridley.wordpress.com...

Yeah, for what it is worth, there was a false start getting the study out about the same time last year...

Ok, for the sake of time ( and I hope all of you understand), I will answer everyone publicly here. I keep getting a lot of emails from everyone wanting to know the status of the project. Though I cannot give details or timing, I will assure everyone that all is well and we are continuing to move forward.

Good science cannot be forced or quickly completed. If it is not extremely thorough, then it will all be for naught and any paper rejected outright. So, I ask you to be patient and understanding and realize that extreme scientific overkill is required in order to convince a world full of skeptical scientists. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof".

This is what we are doing. When we started this, I thought we would be finished in a few weeks, but instead as Sasquatch are known to do, they threw us curve balls even with their DNA which can be as elusive as they are.

Thank goodness we are past that! As a result, we have assembled a renowned team, each of us with our own specialties to make this project "extraordinary". If everyone will hang in there, I promise it will be worth the wait. We have the proof, now just give us the opportunity to present it in a form that will even convince skeptics.

Thanks so much for all of your emails and support. Best wishes to all.

-Dr. Melba Ketchum

bigfootevidence.blogspot.com...

edit on 26-11-2012 by Xoanon because:

Originally posted by ikonoklast
For what it's worth, she really was a former treasurer of the Association of Forensic DNA Analysts and Administrators as her bio claims:

AFDAA Past Officers

And she has published papers through the International Society for Animal Genetics (ISAG).

AFDAA wasn't formally organized until 2009. Before 2009 she was treasurer of a "group with shared interests", so to speak. Kind of if I was treasurer of the fantasy baseball league I'm in. When AFDAA became professionally organized, she did not hold that office anymore.

However, she is still listing it as if she currently would hold that office, and that is deceitful.

For my taste, she has zero credibility.

While Dr. Ketchum may well be a real authority on DNA testing what I find most likely is that she has uncovered the DNA sequence of Orangutans.
There is no way on earth we could find multilple hair samples of such a creature but never find any identifiable bones.
Somebody has pulled a fast one.

reply to post by nv4711

Well, she never had a "career in science" to begin with (or, should I say that could be "ended"). She's a veterinarian, not a scientist.

I mean no offense, but in defense of Dr. Melba, who is not with us at the moment, I feel that I should point out that Veterinary medicine, is indeed, a branch of science...

Veterinary medicine is the branch of science that deals with the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of disease, disorder and injury in animals. The scope of veterinary medicine is wide, covering all animal species, both domesticated and wild, with a wide range of conditions which can affect different species.

en.wikipedia.org...

If she has specialized then she is, I am sure, totally qualified to work in the field of genetics. And it also does not mean that she is not possibly a crank.

Either way though, she's a scientist.

Originally posted by Xoanon
reply to post by nv4711

 

Well, she never had a "career in science" to begin with (or, should I say that could be "ended"). She's a veterinarian, not a scientist.

I mean no offense, but in defense of Dr. Melba, who is not with us at the moment, I feel that I should point out that Veterinary medicine, is indeed, a branch of science...

Veterinary medicine is the branch of science that deals with the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of disease, disorder and injury in animals. The scope of veterinary medicine is wide, covering all animal species, both domesticated and wild, with a wide range of conditions which can affect different species.

en.wikipedia.org...

If she has specialized then she is, I am sure, totally qualified to work in the field of genetics. And it also does not mean that she is not possibly a crank.

Either way though, she's a scientist.

edit on 26-11-2012 by Xoanon because:

I'm afraid I have to disagree with Wikipedia. Would you consider your family doctor to be a scientist? It's the difference between knowing how to cure a disease (based on somebody elses scientific research) and doing the research to find the cure for a disease.

In the US, an Audio-Video technician is classified to work in the field of "Physical Sciences", just like a Physicist. I'm sure you'll agree that the guy from the Geek Squad is not a scientist

But, I don't want to nit-pick.... point is that I'm convinced that she's got nothing.

George Knapp and a guest are discussing the DNA results on Coast To Coast AM right now. Fascinating information! A non human being mated with a human female... A hybrid human.

Originally posted by Evildead
George Knapp and a guest are discussing the DNA results on Coast To Coast AM right now. Fascinating information! A non human being mated with a human female... A hybrid human.

edit on 11/26/12 by Evildead because: (no reason given)

Interesting, that they are discussing "results" that so far nobody has seen. All they have is a press release that proves nothing.

Besides, it would be interesting to hear how this cross breeding would have overcome the problem of all other cross species breeds in nature, that, to my knowledge always result in sterility of the offspring. An example is the Mule. This means that the offspring of the human female and the mystery-primate could not have had offspring of their own and therefore no Bigfoot could exist.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
...
There is no way on earth we could find multilple hair samples of such a creature but never find any identifiable bones...

The fact that no skeletal remains have been found (that we know of) is not a good enough reason to dismiss the existence of Bigfoot.

There can be plenty of reasons why no bones have been found.

I'm sure you have walked through a stretch of woods at some time or another. How many skeletons or dead animals have you found on your walks? Personally I have spend many, many, many days in the African bush. While I have come upon many animal skeletons - if I think about the amount of skeletons I have not stumbled upon is staggering.
As another example: My brother has a game farm in the north. There has been many reported sightings of leopards in the area, with tracks to prove it as fact, but to this day not a single picture or skeleton of a leopard to support the fact that there are leopards in the area.

Back to the bones that you, and me and thousands of other hikers and nature enthusiasts have found: So you stumble across a bone in the woods. It looks quite interesting. Do you bag it and send it off to your local university for testing - at your own cost? Or do you just turn it around in your hands a couple of times, shrug, and toss it back into the bushes? The point being that for all we know, several Bigfoot bones may have been found over the years - it has just not been scientifically cataloged. Or maybe it has been cataloged, but as something else - take the Gigantopithecus for example. Maybe it's the ancestor of Bigfoot, but we don't know it yet.

If you consider the amount of animals/critters that have died over the past couple of million years in and around forests, we should be seeing piles and piles of animal bones everywhere, yet it's all "gone". And with "gone" I mean absorbed back into the circle of life.

Then consider the opposite. On a daily basis dozens of new species are being discovered. Yes, many of them in far off places like the jungles of Borneo, the Amazon and so on. But every now and again one is discovered in plain sight. And these animals have been living with us for thousands of years.

As for DNA samples? Many Bigfoot sightings coincide with physical evidence. Tracks, hair and even feces. And it shouldn't be a surprise. If I take my two Labradors as an example: At the rate they shed hair, you only have to look at them from a distance and you're covered in white hair. So I can only imagine that a hairy beast like Bigfoot is a forensic investigator's dream.

In conclusion: To dismiss Bigfoot as a hoax simply because of a lack of certain evidence, would be to deny yourself the truth. As the wise words go: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".

reply to post by Druscilla


Aliens dun it.

Originally posted by nv4711

Originally posted by ikonoklast
For what it's worth, she really was a former treasurer of the Association of Forensic DNA Analysts and Administrators as her bio claims:

AFDAA Past Officers

And she has published papers through the International Society for Animal Genetics (ISAG).

AFDAA wasn't formally organized until 2009. Before 2009 she was treasurer of a "group with shared interests", so to speak. Kind of if I was treasurer of the fantasy baseball league I'm in. When AFDAA became professionally organized, she did not hold that office anymore.

However, she is still listing it as if she currently would hold that office, and that is deceitful.

For my taste, she has zero credibility.

I have no idea how much credibility she has, but she is not claiming to currently hold that office. Her bio on the DNA Diagnostics, Inc. site clearly says:

She is a former Treasurer for AFDAA...

And on the AFDAA Past Officers page it clearly says:

AFDAA formalized as an organization in early 2009. Prior to that date, many of or members worked very hard in an unofficial capacity to help AFDAA grow by serving in the roles of officers.
...
Treasurer

Angela Tanzillo-Swarts.......2009-2010

Prior to 2009

Melba Ketchum, Catherine Caballero

It is about time they found that DNA I have been waiting for this fow some time now., I wonder where they all live?

Wow, when I woke up this morning I didn't think I'd be reading this today.
Interested to see what happens.

Originally posted by Gemwolf

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
...
There is no way on earth we could find multilple hair samples of such a creature but never find any identifiable bones...

The fact that no skeletal remains have been found (that we know of) is not a good enough reason to dismiss the existence of Bigfoot.
There can be plenty of reasons why no bones have been found.
How many skeletons or dead animals have you found on your walks?

Hundreds I would guess. Although it's rare to find skeletons I often find remnants of animals. What you will find are skulls due to the fact that few animals are able to either carry it or there is not enough nutrition to make it worth the effort. I have a collection of animal skulls I've found over the years. It's the same deal with early man - we often find skulls but no other bones, that is why this is often the case. As a South African you will understand if I say that I'm an animal tracker. Most Americans just shake their heads when I tell them and their eyes glaze over.

Do you walk human trails or do you follow game paths? Do you bushwhack and go in to areas simply because it looks as if no person could have been through that are in a long time? I intentionally go in to briar thickets and crawl through dense vegetation simply to see those places. I enjoy the challenge of negotiating the terrain.

Originally posted by Gemwolf
Do you bag it and send it off to your local university for testing - at your own cost? Or do you just turn it around in your hands a couple of times, shrug, and toss it back into the bushes?

Sometimes I can identify them, sometimes I bring them home to look them up. Again, not what most people do, The fact remains however that skulls are best utilized by small critters and insects who can gain entry through the holes and are often left behind by the larger carnivores who either can't crack it open, can't carry it off or arrive too late to get any nutrition from it.

I should add that I have yet to see any convincing track evidence and scats are probably bear or elk that they've found. Thing is when was last time any land animal near the size of a human or larger was discovered? No, I'm denying evidence, I'm making an assertion based on the absolute lack of it. Bigfoot certainly doesn't exist in North America, that much I can be sure of, whether such a creature could survive in the Himalayas is another matter but then again what would such a large creature survive on there? I wanted to believe in their existence for many years but after 40 years of no hard evidence I would be lying to say I believe it now.

I used to think people claiming to have seen mountain lions in Virginia were telling tall tales until I saw one myself.

David Paulides- was on George Knapp show last night. It was a real good up-date.

Bigfoot DNA:

In the first hour, former lawman turned investigative journalist, David Paulides, detailed a potential breakthrough in Bigfoot DNA research. He explained that, as a result of a five year study, his colleague has been able to "unlock a method to get to the DNA itself and how to test for it" within possible Bigfoot hair samples. As a result of this development, Paulides said, the findings indicate that Bigfoot is a "very unique homo sapien" species and that part of the DNA is "nowhere in the billions of documented DNA ever seen." He stressed that this testing has eliminated the possibility that Bigfoot are either Neanderthals or large primates and actually reveals that they are "thinking, breathing, intellectual people that are quite different" from humans.

reply to post by nv4711


You seem like a good guy, but digging and ripping into Dr.Ketchum is pointless as 4 other labs also collaborated in testing. For me to agree with you, I'd have to be convinced as many as ten other people had no idea what they were doing, or looking at, and agreed to perpetuate a hoax. That they all did this knowing they would be ripped apartby the world media.

You may not like the way this was handled, you may not ''approve'' of the way it was released however there is no reason for saying the science isn't there. Until we see it no one knows. I am encouraged another geneticist who does know apparently, what that press release said, has no problems with what's been released to date.

Matter of factly that's exactly where this stands.

reply to post by RUFFREADY


Thanks a bunch for that! Is it possible you have a link? I didn't know Paulides was going to be doing a interview.

You do know according to the summerians, about 15,000 years ago sasquatch's were combined with alien dna to create modern humans.

This is why sasquatch dna would more closely match us than other primates. With a complete squatch sequence, we should even be able to tell exactly what sections are alien in our own dna but comparing with other primates to see whats different.

The man in this video makes the connection between Bigfoot and the Nephilim, kinda.


I don't know...my mind is totally blown when thinking of a race of giant, intelligent, hairy, human hybrid living in the North American wilderness. I don't know...

Reminds me of a show I used to watch when I was a kid;