Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Melba Ketchun on AM Coast to Coast


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#31    keninsc

keninsc

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 3,234 posts
  • Joined:08 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The problem with people who have no vices is that generally you can be pretty sure they're going to have some pretty annoying virtues. Liz Taylor

Posted 18 February 2013 - 11:13 AM

We're not hanging on her every word she speaks, but I am curious how people's minds work. This is an excellent example of how scams work. Whether Dyer and Ketchum are in league with each other is yet to be determined, however, Dyer has mentioned her a couple times in interviews as being someone he had something positive to say about. I can't repeat on here what he had to say about Jeff Meldrum, however to paraphrase he called him "Dr vaginal wash suitcase". I didn't listen to it last night but I plan to listen to it later.


#32    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 18 February 2013 - 11:16 PM

Anyone have a link yet? Coast to Coast wanted me to sign up/in.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#33    evancj

evancj

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,778 posts
  • Joined:07 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern, UT

Posted 19 February 2013 - 01:29 AM

Ha Ha Ha!!!

I just saw your quote from Todd Disotell.


#34    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 20 February 2013 - 11:42 AM

Here's the interview. I'll listen to it later today while standing on a fire ant hill.

http://www.cryptomun.../ketchum-c2c-4/

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#35    TheSearcher

TheSearcher

    Coffee expert extraordinair

  • Member
  • 3,845 posts
  • Joined:16 Jun 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 20 February 2013 - 12:40 PM

Just listened to it, well........still istening......seems to me the woman loves to hear herself talk right?  Now, from what i've read, Denovo technically existed before under another name, but it was recently re-started by Ketchum et al. for publishing this paper. She admits as much several times in the interview.  "All we were trying to do with this paper was to ....." for example.

I think the little credibility she still had with some is taking a nose dive really fast.

It is only the ignorant who despise education.
Publilius Syrus.

So god made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom?!

#36    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 21 February 2013 - 03:08 AM

A brief summary of her interview: And yes, it was more painful than the fire ants.

They had 111 samples of blood, saliva, hair and similar. Most all were collected from eye-witnesses actually having viewed the creatures the samples came from.

As far as the hair samples, they were 3-4 inches in length and when examined under a microscope by a hair analysis expert, did not resemble human hair. However, when the mitochondrial DNA was tested it was  modern human. Then, after testing the nuclear DNA they found strange sequencing with bits of human DNA but also weird bands of novel DNA not in the GenBank.

Some of the samples were collected through the Erickson Project. A project overseen by a PhD wildlife biologist. The researchers would feed the bigfoot on Tupperware and when the bigfoot were done eating they would immediately collect the Tupperware to retrieve DNA samples. One of these Erickson habituation site creatures is the famous “Matilda” and her DNA is one of the few female samples submitted.

Ketchum saw her first sasquatch about two-years ago. She has seen several since then. The most she has seen at one time are nine at a habituation site. She advises to not go looking in the woods for them. You are liable to get shot by another human. (So, never go in the woods, apparently)

The study obtained three different varieties from three different areas of the country. For example, one from Alabama, a known “skunk ape” range. Which would "make sense", since it is described differently than sasquatch from other areas of the country.

Ketchum now has some research going in the background to study their behavior and culture. She wants to start a foundation for non-invasive research of these creatures.

She began (or took over) the DeNovo scientific journal to be a publication alternative for those who have had papers shunned by the larger journals. It will be fair and not biased.

Ketchum believes bigfoot probably do bury their dead, but her lab does have a bone sample now. They avoid any kind of cameras and know how to blend in better than any animal on the planet.

According to Ketchum, the mystery is solved. Sasquatch do exist. The only thing is getting mainstream science to get on board and some have shown an interest and are evaluating her data now. According to Ketchum these creatures do not follow the Darwinian Theory and therefore mainstream science does not like it and refuses to hear it. (she has also been known to go down a biblical path with her bigfoot ancestory claims)

According to Ketchum, we have a species originating from modern human females that’s less than 13,000 years old and is a modern extant species, (that is, alive today). We have a novel hominin here. Either derived from human that has mutated excessively or a hybrid. When asked about interspecies mating? She points to the Russian “Zena” story, as an example of viability.

I thought this was interesting. The Coast to Coast interviewer pointed out this quote from Richard Gibbs, one of the key scientists behind the Human Genome Project and director of the Human Genome Sequencing Center at Baylor College of Medicine. He was asked his opinion on Ketchum’s study
“As a scientist I would consider anything. The currency of scientific advance is keeping your skepticism at bay. You have to approach these things incredibly agnostically. As I read the paper I asked, is the evidence here compelling? I don’t know. Is there clear evidence of fraud? That’s not apparent. It’s an intriguing hypothesis. One would need to view more sequencing information before supporting the conclusions.”

Definitely food for thought, but with all due respect, I believe spoken from one unfamiliar with the bigfoot history and its players.

Edited by QuiteContrary, 21 February 2013 - 03:11 AM.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#37    No Censorship

No Censorship

    Poltergeist

  • Validating
  • 2,784 posts
  • Joined:31 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 February 2013 - 03:28 AM

It's a shame that this project wasn't handled by Coleman and Meldrum with advice from Sykes, a great historical geneticist. That trio also could have received input from an expert in zoology. They then could have published their findings in a scientific journal with a good reputation. Their peers could have reviewed it to their hearts' content (if there was material to review).

There is one reality with billions of versions.

#38    TheSearcher

TheSearcher

    Coffee expert extraordinair

  • Member
  • 3,845 posts
  • Joined:16 Jun 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 21 February 2013 - 08:30 AM

View PostQuiteContrary, on 21 February 2013 - 03:08 AM, said:

A brief summary of her interview: And yes, it was more painful than the fire ants.

They had 111 samples of blood, saliva, hair and similar. Most all were collected from eye-witnesses actually having viewed the creatures the samples came from.

As far as the hair samples, they were 3-4 inches in length and when examined under a microscope by a hair analysis expert, did not resemble human hair. However, when the mitochondrial DNA was tested it was  modern human. Then, after testing the nuclear DNA they found strange sequencing with bits of human DNA but also weird bands of novel DNA not in the GenBank.

Some of the samples were collected through the Erickson Project. A project overseen by a PhD wildlife biologist. The researchers would feed the bigfoot on Tupperware and when the bigfoot were done eating they would immediately collect the Tupperware to retrieve DNA samples. One of these Erickson habituation site creatures is the famous “Matilda” and her DNA is one of the few female samples submitted.

Ketchum saw her first sasquatch about two-years ago. She has seen several since then. The most she has seen at one time are nine at a habituation site. She advises to not go looking in the woods for them. You are liable to get shot by another human. (So, never go in the woods, apparently)

The study obtained three different varieties from three different areas of the country. For example, one from Alabama, a known “skunk ape” range. Which would "make sense", since it is described differently than sasquatch from other areas of the country.

Ketchum now has some research going in the background to study their behavior and culture. She wants to start a foundation for non-invasive research of these creatures.

She began (or took over) the DeNovo scientific journal to be a publication alternative for those who have had papers shunned by the larger journals. It will be fair and not biased.

Ketchum believes bigfoot probably do bury their dead, but her lab does have a bone sample now. They avoid any kind of cameras and know how to blend in better than any animal on the planet.

According to Ketchum, the mystery is solved. Sasquatch do exist. The only thing is getting mainstream science to get on board and some have shown an interest and are evaluating her data now. According to Ketchum these creatures do not follow the Darwinian Theory and therefore mainstream science does not like it and refuses to hear it. (she has also been known to go down a biblical path with her bigfoot ancestory claims)

According to Ketchum, we have a species originating from modern human females that’s less than 13,000 years old and is a modern extant species, (that is, alive today). We have a novel hominin here. Either derived from human that has mutated excessively or a hybrid. When asked about interspecies mating? She points to the Russian “Zena” story, as an example of viability.

I thought this was interesting. The Coast to Coast interviewer pointed out this quote from Richard Gibbs, one of the key scientists behind the Human Genome Project and director of the Human Genome Sequencing Center at Baylor College of Medicine. He was asked his opinion on Ketchum’s study
“As a scientist I would consider anything. The currency of scientific advance is keeping your skepticism at bay. You have to approach these things incredibly agnostically. As I read the paper I asked, is the evidence here compelling? I don’t know. Is there clear evidence of fraud? That’s not apparent. It’s an intriguing hypothesis. One would need to view more sequencing information before supporting the conclusions.”

Definitely food for thought, but with all due respect, I believe spoken from one unfamiliar with the bigfoot history and its players.

Assuming that it's actually all true and the evidence real.

It is only the ignorant who despise education.
Publilius Syrus.

So god made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom?!

#39    Earl.Of.Trumps

Earl.Of.Trumps

    BigFoot Whisperer

  • Member
  • 3,653 posts
  • Joined:20 Dec 2011
  • Location:Planet Elsewhere

  • One of the beginnings of human emancipation is knowing when authority needs to be corrected | Hitchens, adapted

Posted 21 February 2013 - 10:58 PM

View Postkeninsc, on 17 February 2013 - 05:59 AM, said:

Oh I agree, but I think there is some sort of conspiracy-like thing going on, at least in my mind, there are too many consistencies going on. Ketchum's self-published report which never was peer reviewed, then sudden Dyer's got another body and his now infamous tent footage. Then this guy Musky Allen, who there is no record of before 2006 or so and claims to be a huge skeptic is converted to being a believer after he's seen "the body", much like Saul on the road to Tarsus.......and oh yeah. There's this film maker who's mentioned all over but not talking himself or......as far as I know......made any comments about this mysterious film that's supposed to be in the works.

Now I will have to say that if I shot a Bigfoot, I might well be quiet about it until I got the results from some real scientists for verification purposes, but these guys are out dropping little bombs of information then jumping behind the veil of legal permission and they all signed these secrecy and non-disclosure agrees, apparently in blood.....but they keep talking about it, until someone tries to get some real information out of them, then they jump behind the secrecy thing again.

My own feeling is there is a huge scam in the works and it involves several people.

I'm a squatch believer but I side with you here. I sense a big scam.

BTW, I turned in and I see you like Goerge Noory, as do I.

I wonder why they had Ketchum on Sunday night when George had the night off? LOL is that a *tell* of some kind?

View Postevancj, on 18 February 2013 - 02:24 AM, said:

With that line of reasoning, I guess I should watch every episode of the Kardashians on off chance I might learn something.


ROFLMAO!!

classical, man

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps, 21 February 2013 - 11:06 PM.

There are no such things as Lenticular clouds, only UFO's in disguise


"I'm not trying to say your wrong, I'm just saying I disagree with you" ~ Jeremy ~


#40    evancj

evancj

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,778 posts
  • Joined:07 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Northern, UT

Posted 22 February 2013 - 12:58 AM

Thanks for taking this bullet for me QC, I owe you one. :tu:

View PostQuiteContrary, on 21 February 2013 - 03:08 AM, said:

Some of the samples were collected through the Erickson Project. A project overseen by a PhD wildlife biologist. The researchers would feed the bigfoot on Tupperware and when the bigfoot were done eating they would immediately collect the Tupperware to retrieve DNA samples. One of these Erickson habituation site creatures is the famous “Matilda” and her DNA is one of the few female samples submitted.

Ketchum saw her first sasquatch about two-years ago. She has seen several since then. The most she has seen at one time are nine at a habituation site. She advises to not go looking in the woods for them. You are liable to get shot by another human. (So, never go in the woods, apparently)


This kills me.

Why go through this huge elaborate debacle, when all you have to do is show these habituated animals to some real scientists? That would squash any skepticism about her and her paper outright, and she would become rich, famous, and credible all in one swoop.


View PostQuiteContrary, on 21 February 2013 - 03:08 AM, said:

According to Ketchum, the mystery is solved. Sasquatch do exist. The only thing is getting mainstream science to get on board and some have shown an interest and are evaluating her data now. According to Ketchum these creatures do not follow the Darwinian Theory and therefore mainstream science does not like it and refuses to hear it. (she has also been known to go down a biblical path with her bigfoot ancestory claims)


Huge red flag!!!

Big bad science don't believe in creationism. What a cop out.


View PostQuiteContrary, on 21 February 2013 - 03:08 AM, said:

I thought this was interesting. The Coast to Coast interviewer pointed out this quote from Richard Gibbs, one of the key scientists behind the Human Genome Project and director of the Human Genome Sequencing Center at Baylor College of Medicine. He was asked his opinion on Ketchum’s study
“As a scientist I would consider anything. The currency of scientific advance is keeping your skepticism at bay. You have to approach these things incredibly agnostically. As I read the paper I asked, is the evidence here compelling? I don’t know. Is there clear evidence of fraud? That’s not apparent. It’s an intriguing hypothesis. One would need to view more sequencing information before supporting the conclusions.”

Definitely food for thought, but with all due respect, I believe spoken from one unfamiliar with the bigfoot history and its players.

I'm taking Dr. Gibbs statement as a polite way as saying her paper was not quite up to snuff. I absouly agree that her hypothisis is intriging...but not in a sound scientific way.

Over all it looks like the same BS she has been spewing for the past 5 years or so. The only new thing for me is that she bases her science on the bible, which explains a lot.

Thanks again QC :tu:


#41    Q-C

Q-C

    BugWhisperer

  • Member
  • 5,533 posts
  • Joined:06 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tejas

Posted 22 February 2013 - 01:58 AM

View Postevancj, on 22 February 2013 - 12:58 AM, said:

This kills me.

Why go through this huge elaborate debacle, when all you have to do is show these habituated animals to some real scientists? That would squash any skepticism about her and her paper outright, and she would become rich, famous, and credible all in one swoop.

*snip*

Even with everything else, some much more condemning...but putting aside the implausability of the habituation claim, this is what I find the most incredulous of all. She could have avoided a lot of agony. (she's also said she would not want go through this again, and had she known she would have never undertaken it) And the testing would have even been peer-reviewed in a real science journal!!!

She also told of bigfoot encounters on her property and around her horses. So, she was then asked about cameras. She gave the same BIGFOOT v CAMERA answers we've heard numerous times. She actually did try, and got her camera out once and well, you know the rest of the story.

Edited by QuiteContrary, 22 February 2013 - 02:08 AM.

Bigfoot is in the eye of the beholder

Scottish Scientists Only!

#42    Fstop

Fstop

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 270 posts
  • Joined:20 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 February 2013 - 04:47 PM

View PostQuiteContrary, on 22 February 2013 - 01:58 AM, said:

*snip*

Even with everything else, some much more condemning...but putting aside the implausability of the habituation claim, this is what I find the most incredulous of all. She could have avoided a lot of agony. (she's also said she would not want go through this again, and had she known she would have never undertaken it) And the testing would have even been peer-reviewed in a real science journal!!!

She also told of bigfoot encounters on her property and around her horses. So, she was then asked about cameras. She gave the same BIGFOOT v CAMERA answers we've heard numerous times. She actually did try, and got her camera out once and well, you know the rest of the story.

What some smart person ought to do is make a "secret" bigfoot hunting camera for these folks that looks like a stick or rock or something.

Bigfoot: :"Ugg....him carrying something....camera?  Ugg...no that tree branch...false alarm."

Bigfoot Hunter:  "Heh heh heh...I've got you now."  click click

That was probably much more entertaining for me than the rest of you.  My apologies.  ;)

We don’t see things as they are. We see things as we are. – Anais Nin

#43    keninsc

keninsc

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 3,234 posts
  • Joined:08 Mar 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The problem with people who have no vices is that generally you can be pretty sure they're going to have some pretty annoying virtues. Liz Taylor

Posted 23 February 2013 - 05:00 PM

View PostEarl.Of.Trumps, on 21 February 2013 - 10:58 PM, said:

I'm a squatch believer but I side with you here. I sense a big scam.

BTW, I turned in and I see you like Goerge Noory, as do I.

I wonder why they had Ketchum on Sunday night when George had the night off? LOL is that a *tell* of some kind?




ROFLMAO!!

classical, man

If memory serves, George did get into some disagreement with a guy.......I can't recall who it was who was charging for people to see something on hia website which turned out to be false and George demanded that the guy refund the money people sent into to him. It was Bigfoot related and what with all the hoopla we've been seeing, George may just want to keep his hands clean of the flying debris.


#44    Fstop

Fstop

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 270 posts
  • Joined:20 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 February 2013 - 05:03 PM

View Postkeninsc, on 23 February 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

If memory serves, George did get into some disagreement with a guy.......I can't recall who it was who was charging for people to see something on hia website which turned out to be false and George demanded that the guy refund the money people sent into to him. It was Bigfoot related and what with all the hoopla we've been seeing, George may just want to keep his hands clean of the flying debris.

Especially with so much of it hitting the fan these days!  haha

We don’t see things as they are. We see things as we are. – Anais Nin

#45    TheSearcher

TheSearcher

    Coffee expert extraordinair

  • Member
  • 3,845 posts
  • Joined:16 Jun 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium

Posted 23 February 2013 - 05:08 PM

View Postkeninsc, on 23 February 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

If memory serves, George did get into some disagreement with a guy.......I can't recall who it was who was charging for people to see something on hia website which turned out to be false and George demanded that the guy refund the money people sent into to him. It was Bigfoot related and what with all the hoopla we've been seeing, George may just want to keep his hands clean of the flying debris.

Can you blame him though, this is turning out to be yet another big disillusion for all the bigfoot believers. I nearly feel sorry for them.

It is only the ignorant who despise education.
Publilius Syrus.

So god made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom?!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users