Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Did a Major Science Journal Attempt to Sabatoge The Ketchum DNA Study?

Sketch of a DNA Donor Bigfoot
On March 15th, 2013 Robert Lindsay posted the following on his blog concerning the erroneous claims of critics that the DNA was contaminated:

"No contamination in Ketchum DNA findings. There is some little-known evidence that there is no contamination in her samples: Ketchum tested the Bigfoot nuDNA for several human genes, the names of which you can find in the manuscript. MC1R (human/Neanderthal red-hair color gene) showed up in the Bigfoot nuDNA as did the human antigen gene TAP1 (most of the time) and the jaw muscle gene MYH16 (which when present showed only a human profile rather than an ape one).
Not discussed in the manuscript are the tests Ketchum did for the TYR gene, which is associated with skin pigmentation, and the HAR1 gene, which is a “human accelerated region” associated with human neurological development. The human skin color gene TYR and human brain gene HAR1 were not found in Bigfoot nuDNA. Now that in and of itself is very interesting.


If the samples really were just bear or coyote or bobcat smeared with human contamination, all of the human genes should show up all over the place. The peer-reviewers for Ketchum’s manuscript only wanted positive, not negative, results included for gene tests, so the TYR and HAR1 data are not discussed in the manuscript. However, you can see the remnants of it in the Supplemental Data 12 appendix. The bottom line is the Bigfoot nuDNA is missing some important human genes that should be there if the nuDNA were in fact simply contaminated with human DNA.

Furthermore, if the samples were simply bears, coyotes or whatever with no human contamination present, the human genes listed above would not be there at all.

The conclusion is that the “contamination” meme bandied about is simply a red herring. Ketchum’s DNA results, whatever they were and whatever they mean, ere simply not a result of contamination in any way, shape or form. Critics really need to get over the contamination BS."

Via: http://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/ 

 The part of Robert Lindsay's post that peaked my curiosity was the following:

The peer-reviewers for Ketchum’s manuscript only wanted positive, not negative, results included for gene tests, so the TYR and HAR1 data are not discussed in the manuscript. However, you can see the remnants of it in the Supplemental Data 12 appendix. The bottom line is the Bigfoot nuDNA is missing some important human genes that should be there if the nuDNA were in fact simply contaminated with human DNA.

If I am reading this correctly the "peer-reviewers" only wanted "positive results". I asked myself why? The conclusion I came up with is that having the "negative" results in the paper prove that the DNA is NOT from a known ANIMAL and NOT from a HUMAN. This is the point of the study! If the samples are not from a known animal and not from a human then WE HAVE A NEW PREVIOUSLY UNDISCOVERED SPECIES. Since the samples were collected in areas were Bigfoot/Sasquatch were witnessed and/or filmed the the logical conclusion is this new "SPECIES" IS A BIGFOOT.  Apparently this is a reality that the "peer reviewers" could not accept due to personal/professional bias. So they requested Dr. Ketchum remove the negative results from her study.

Folks the scientific community, the Team Tazer clowns,  and those who insist Bigfoot is an APE are using the general public's ignorance of DNA testing and the Scientific Protocols to misinform and LIE about the Ketchum DNA Study. I know the DNA results are difficult to interpret and I so wish Dr. Ketchum would have published plan language abstract of the paper for us layman, but she did not. I would encourage you to do your own home work and do not take the word of these so called "experts". We all have an agenda, at least I am up front about mine, I support the study and the work done by Dr. Ketchum and the DNA study team,  These critics of the study appear to have a large stake in discrediting , I have to wonder why?




9 comments:

  1. it makes me raise an eyebrow as to why they are so eager to disprove it. if the videos, pictures and audio tapes from you and people such as Sasquatch Ontario isn't enough, then what is? i bet they would refute it even if a Sasquatch was standing 5 feet from them out in the open, with perfect lighting, captured on a HD video recorder, with no shaky cam, and the Sasquatch was talking to them. i like to look at team tazer as internet trolls, really.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. *sighs* i MEANT snowwalkerprime and the those other people that i can't remember right now -_-

      Delete
  2. For starters, I am of fan of yours and Team Tazers. Team Tazer has a lot of different people with a lot of different opinions. They are a group that is slowly trying to get the bigfoot community to work together...... which should have been done a long time ago. They have a lot of reputable researchers they work with, and I think they should be commended for the work they do.

    Besides that, I am still wondering why there has been no other scientists that have looked at this paper? Between all the people involved, I would think someone would have some connection somewhere to get another opinion on what was formulated in the paper. I want the paper to be "the paper" so bad, but with-out someone saying publically from a different agency that the paper was done correctly and the science is real, I and so many other people will have a tough time taking it for what it is. For me, the reason being, I am not a scientist, nor do I know anything on how DNA papers should be presented, and right now the only group that is telling me how itshould be is the Ketchum group. Its tough to come up with a conclusion with-out hearing different scientific opinions.

    Also, if science is sabotaging this, the emails and communications should be published. I would like to see what local universities and colleges around your area would have to say when asked if they could read the paper and provide a written opinion on it.

    Sorry to come across a little skeptical today, I just thought by now, someone in the ketchun group (so many people with a lot of connections) would have had a major science group/department from somewhere in the country read and issue a public statement of their opinion. Or, at least some publication of all the denial the team has recieved since the paper has been released............ not the stuff that happened during publication.

    Paul

    ReplyDelete
  3. There is currently an independent review of the DNA study on going. The scientist did come forward and Dr. Ketchum gave them access to her work and agreed to accept their findings. Most Scientist are afraid of the study and the subject. It carries a huge stigma with it.

    I agree 100% and have asked Dr. Ketchum to remove the identifiers and publish the crazy request many of the peer reviewers made. I was also sent copies of the GenBank emails and I can vouch that Dr. Ketchum is telling the truth, GenBank gave her the run around and made up lame excuses not to accept the Genomes. But due to "privacy concerns" I can not divulge the emails, I can only talk about what I have read.

    I am defending the study and backing everything up with sound scientific logic and documentation. Just go back through my blog post over the last few weeks and you will see article after article.

    And even the source for this blog was independent, it came from Robert Lindsay, and he is not a "Melba Fan".

    Thanks for your post!
    Scott

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No problem Scott! I have been a supporter of this study and the people involved as well as many other people in the industry. Time will tell. And I really hope everyone involved gets vindicated soon. You havent lost a supporter. I'm one of those hard to find "patient" people.

      Delete
  4. Why is everybody ignoring David H. Swenson, PhD biochemist with extensive and impecable credentials and huge experience in top genetics, who is the only "true" scientist that we know of so far to have REALLY READ the paper AND HAD THE DATA to check it out? The first such case and guess what? Publicly supported her work and conclusions.
    It was reported here and on a couple places, and after that just ignored, while giggling youngsters from Breaking Bio, immersed in bias and who admittedly gave the paper a couple of minutes, were all over the internet?

    ReplyDelete
  5. The science world seems to discredit a very solid study of the DNA.But why? Why is it so hard for them to just look at the study and go buy the data?Scott why do you think they do this?It's almost like They have something to hide.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "There is currently an independent review of the DNA study on going. The scientist did come forward and Dr. Ketchum gave them access to her work and agreed to accept their findings. Most Scientist are afraid of the study and the subject. It carries a huge stigma with it. "

    What is intresting the people over on BFF think they should be the ones to review it. Or have statements given to them.
    Yet many just trash her. So I can not wait to read what other people say about her work.

    Thank you for the Information Scott.

    ReplyDelete