Possible Bigfoot "Eye Glow"

A friend and fellow researcher Greg Graddock captured some interesting video on Memorial Day. Greg's research area is also in the National Park approximately 60 miles north of the area I research in the National Park. On this trip Greg uses night vision to capture a unexplainable and eerie glow just outside his camp.

Click Here to read - Possible Bigfoot Eyeglow Behind My Tent Video

Bigfoot Research - My First Back Trail Camera Capture of a Bigfoot

In March of 2011 I made my first successful capture of a Bigfoot using my "Back Trail" camera. Though I had captured Bigfoot before filming backwards, this was the first success I enjoyed with shoulder mounted rig. This Bigfoot was well camouflaged. It was standing in a thicket peeking out with only one eye. This one eye peeking tactic is used by the Bigfoot on a regular basis. With grey skin and black hair on its body the Bigfoot was practically invisible.  The left eye and the glint of sun off the left cheek is what I spotted first. 

This is the Bigfoot doing its thing, hiding, following, and watching.

Huffington Post Reviews David Paulides' MISSING 411

David's MISSING 411 series is beginning to get the mainstream attention it deserves.

Click here to read interview 

 

New Blog Page Takes You "Behind The Scenes" with the Ketchum DNA Study

I have added a new page to my blog that goes into the detail and background of what happened concerning infamous Sample 26 of the Ketchum DNA Study. This is the sample given to the study by Justin Smeja. He claimed to have shot and killed two Bigfoot, an adult and an infant. The critics used this sample to perpetrate a hoax in an  attempt to discredit the DNA Study. Read the full story of the events that took place and decide for yourself.

 Click here to go to the new page

Commentary: The Sykes DNA Study – What will the results show? And the “dirty little secret”

With October fast approaching the “Bigfoot World” is wondering what the Sykes study will show. Unlike the Ketchum DNA Study, Dr. Sykes has not been betrayed by close personal friends or colleges involved in his study, so except for a few rumors we have no “leaks”. There also seems to be no big interest in any of Dr. Sykes personal beliefs, financial dealings, past indiscretions, or delays in publishing results when promised. It appears the media and blogs that report on Bigfoot are willing to be patient and just wait for the results. I find the disparity in the treatment of Dr. Sykes verses Dr. Ketchum to be reprehensible and hypocritical. In a business that is all about clicks to generate revenue it appears politics and agendas are overriding the all mighty dollar, so in a nut shell Dr. Sykes is “getting a pass”.

While the media and blogs patiently await Dr. Sykes findings I was contemplating what the results of his DNA Study might be. I came up with three possible results:

·        All the samples were from a known animal (Bear, Horse, Wolf, Dog, etc.)

·        A new species of “Bipedal Ape”

·        The results will be similar to and support the findings in the Ketchum DNA Study

David Paulides Answers Questions On The Site - Above Top Secret

David Paulides took the time to answer questions on the web site Above Top Secret. Dave received questions concerning topics like Bigfoot, DNA, UFO's, and Missing 411.

Click here to see question and answers with David Paulides

Bigfoot Research - Residential Visits - Message Received, Answered, and Acknowledged

I discover more activity at my residence and I also think I figured out what the feathers and bone were all about.

 

Bigfoot Research - Did I Capture The Same Bigfoot Twice?

I was working on a composite sketch of what I call the "Bigfoot in The Laurel". A composite sketch is when you take real elements from the still capture to create a reasonable facsimile of the subject. The more of the face you have the less you have to "fill in". When I finished the sketch I noticed it had some features similar to the Bigfoot that I captured sneaking behind me just recently. The Bigfoot in the Laurel Bigfoot was captured watching me from a Laurel thicket in 2010. The Bigfoot behind me was captured on video in July of this year 2013. The Bigfoot were captured in the same area approximately 300 feet apart. The most striking similarity was the high pronounced check bone. In both video the high chiseled cheek bond is easily noticed. 

Below are the comparisons of the two Bigfoot in both actual photos and sketches. What do you think same Bigfoot or related family members?

Bigfoot Research - Possible Residential Visit

I found five feathers stuck in a crack in my drive way and a steak bone on my back deck. This fits the pattern of previous Bigfoot visits to my house. The feathers were not in the drive way the day before and there had been no rain in at least two days. The bone left on the back deck railing was not there the night before because I sat on the deck the night before and nothing was there.

Listen as I am interviewed on "The Joe Show"

I will be appearing on the The Joe Show on Thursday, September 19th, 2013 at 11:00 PM. Tune in and listen as I talk about my research.

The Joe Show

DNA Study - Response to false claim "Accept for publication with revisions" means study was not approved for publication.

A anonymous commenter claimed that he/she has published scientific papers and that the phrase  "Accept for publication with revisions" does not mean the paper was accepted for publication. Another blogger pounced on this comment and used it to rebut my posting of the leaked JAMEZ passing peer review. Below is "Shaw Evidences" erroneous claim:


A blogger named Scott Carpenter was all giddy when he recieved the leaked peer review letter and claimed that Ketchum's paper did indeed pass peer review. His celebration ended rather quickly when a commenter posted this response:

Source: Bigfoot Evidence

Sorry Shawn nice try but I am still "giddy" because your sources are anonymous and have no documentation to back up their claims as usual.

 Below is the statement Shawn was referring to:
  

1adda080-1ad3-11e3-9826-000bcdcb471eSeptember 17, 2013 at 5:26 AM

Scott, please. You are obviously not familiar with the peer review process. "Accept with revisions" means it did NOT pass. It means the revision has to address the points by the reviewers so that it can be accepted. After correction, addition, the review starts all over again. The outcome could still be "Nope, not like this". Besides, this information was out there in December last year already.

Source: I have published in journals myself.

Below is my response:

I respectfully and completely disagree. I have done extensive research on how papers are graded and what protocols the referees or reviewers follow. The term or phrase "accept for publication with revisions" is one of the proper forms of this statement that referees make when a paper has been approved for publication after the revisions have been made. If the anonymous commenter  would have read the JAMEZ peer review he/she would have seen that Dr. Ketchum in her responses to the referees either explained or made the requested revisions.

The commenter is incorrect and has made a false statement. The claim "I have published papers before" holds no value or merit. It is only a baseless claim from an anonymous poster.

Source (s):

The Dogman - Maine to Tennessee

I have a post on my other blog Dogman - The Monsters are Real concerning the similarities between the Dogman I captured on video and the Dogmen Shelley Rockwell-Martin and her family encountered. This experience was featured in Linda Godfrey's Book "Real Wolfmen: True Encounters in Modern America"  and the recently on an episode of Paranormal Witness. 

Click Here to read the story and visit the blog

EXCLUSIVE - Newly leaked Information shows that the Ketchum Bigfoot DNA Study PASSED PEER REVIEW - UPADTED -09/18/2013

This is Dr. Kethcum's Response to the leaked information I received below from her FaceBook Page:

Melba Ketchum

I am so upset that the reviews got leaked. That means I was once again betrayed by an insider. On the up side, I feel a huge relief about it. Now I don't have to sit on this horrible secret anymore. The world now knows how unethically the scientific has behaved. It also knows that we DID pass peer review and with reviews that came from geneticists that work with whole genomes. At least that is what I was told.

Dr. Ketchum verifies the autheticity of the Peer Reviews via a post on her FaceBook page:

Melba Ketchum

As far as all of the documents that were leaked, they are authentic. I didn't leak them though. Some submitters as well as others associated with the project had access to this information so I don't know who did. Those communications are not supposed to be leaked. So if anyone gets sued, it won't be me. They can subpoena the blogger's email trail. I actually am happy about the leak though. At least now everything I have said can be authenticated including the ridiculous and biased nature of the reviews. Now people will know the truth and that we did pass peer review
Dr. Ketchum's DNA Study  the "Novel North American Hominins, Next Generation Sequencing of Three Whole Genomes and Associated Studies" did pass peer review in January 2013. The journal then known as the "Journal of Advanced Zoological Exploration in Zoology" (JAMEZ) gave the Ketchum DNA Study passing reviews and was planning to publish the study in its inaugural edition on or about January 11th, 2013.

Late in the evening of Wednesday January 9th, 2013 I received a phone call from David Paulides, Director of North American Bigfoot Search (NABS) the primary partner of the DNA Study. David informed me that he had just hung up the phone with Dr. Ketchum and she had been given notice that the DNA paper had passed peer review with JAMEZ and the publishing date "would be on or about Friday, January 11th, 2013". David said we should be prepared for some moderate media attention and possible interview request.

Bigfoot Research - National Park Trail Camera Pictures

 I placed a trail camera near the location where I had a recent sighting and found foot prints in the National Park location. I swapped out the SD cards last weekend after two weeks and the video shows the highlights. Nothing major except for the flesh colored photo that may be a finger. A few good shots of a deer in velvet and blurry photos where it is apparent something is investigating the camera.

 

Possible finger ???

Video:

The Ketchum DNA Study for Dummies (Genetic Experts)

Some “genetic experts” are claiming that the DNA sequences that were extracted by Dr. Ketchum are nothing more than mis-identification of common animals because parts of the genome match common animals like possum, bear, coyote, etc. They also claim that any human results must be the result of contamination. This is disingenuous and misleading (A Lie). The “genetic experts” are relying on the general public’s ignorance of genetics to confuse and misrepresent the facts. It has become the latest tactic the critics of the Ketchum DNA Study use to attempt the discredit the study.

The fact is many organisms on this planet share many of the same DNA sequences. The critics are only looking at select sequence of the Ketchum genome and declaring it is a “known animal”. They are not looking at the genome as a whole. Here are some interesting FACTS about the genetic similarity between humans and animals:

·        Genome variation from one human to another is .5% or all humans are 99.5% alike.

·        Chimpanzees are 96% to 98% similar to humans, depending on how it is calculated. (source).

·        Cows (Bos taurus) are 80% genetically similar to humans (source)

·        75% of mouse genes have equivalents in humans (source), 90% of the mouse genome could be lined up with a region on the human genome (source) 99% of mouse genes turn out to have analogues in humans (source)

·        The fruit fly (Drosophila) shares about 60% of its DNA with humans (source).

·        About 60% of chicken genes correspond to a similar human gene. (source).

Dr. Ketchum discovered that the Sasquatch is a hybrid. The mitochondrial DNA which comes from the mother is 100% human but the nuclear DNA which comes from the father is unique or “novel”. This means when Dr. Ketchum extracted the nuclear DNA and used an industry accepted software program that compared the Sasquatch nuclear DNA to ALL the DNA sequences in Genbank. The application is known as BLAST (Basic Local Alignment Search Tool). Genbank contains 152,599,230,112 base pairs.
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GenBank)

 NO match was found for the nuclear DNA, I say again NO MATCH.

When a “genetic expert” claims he has looked at the 3 complete Sasquatch genomes Dr. Ketchum published and he found sequences similar to a possum, bear, dog etc. and that this means the DNA has been “misidentified” or that Dr. Ketchum is “hoaxing her results” then he is misleading you! For all intensive purposes he is lying to you! He is using the fact that a high percentage of the DNA sequences in ALL animals/humans are similar and playing off the general public’s ignorance of this fact to lie and mislead people.

Bigfoot Sighting - Follow-Up Investigation

My recent camping trip gave me the opportunity to do a follow-up investigation in the area where I captured video of a possible Bigfoot in 2011. This is a private campground and this was the first time I had returned to the area. I was unable to locate any rock, stump, or formation that would had formed the head and upper torso of the subject I captured on video. Below is my follow-up and the original video.


 

Bigfoot DNA Study Update - Leaked Documents Show Bias Against Dr. Ketchum and the DNA Study

The recent leaking of the Peer Review of Dr. Ketchum's DNA Study by Journal Nature and her cover letter show the blatant bias she was up against. The reviewers showed how ignorant and biased they were with their criticisms of the study. It appears except for "Referee #1" none of the other reviews bothered to read much of the paper if any of it at all.

The cover letter also details the unethical behavior of the Journal Nature in leaking confidential information and how this had a detrimental impact on the study.

Below is the letter from Dr. Ketchum to The Journal Nature:

I am the corresponding author for the above mentioned manuscript. We (the authors of this manuscript) are extremely unhappy with the ethics of the reviewers chosen by Nature. Please consider this letter as a formal appeal of your process on the previous manuscript, 2011-09-11671 and 2011-09-11671A-Z. We are resubmitting a revised manuscript in an effort to vindicate our reputations and also to give Nature a chance to rectify the scientific bias and the unethical behavior exhibited by the previous reviewers by giving our manuscript a fair chance at publication. Our manuscript and our reputations were tarnished by the reviewers as follows:

1. Release to the public of the first peer review as well as the fact that our manuscript was at Nature. One of the reviewers leaked the original peer review to a “celebrity” that is involved with our subject and it was put on the internet.  Since it has not been published in Nature, this “celebrity” is now calling our study a “fake” on Twitter and elsewhere. This is highly damaging to our careers and never should have happened.  The link states the source of the information as being one of the reviewers. (http://www.cryptomundo.com/bigfoot-report/mm-sasquatch-dna-project/)
2. Reviewers accused our genomes of having contamination even though we went to great lengths to explain how the samples were extracted and screened to rule out contamination. To tell us, as scientists, especially those of us that are forensic scientists, that our samples are contaminated can be likened to accusing us of hoaxing a scientific study or perjuring ourselves in court. As forensic scientists that testify in court, this can be highly damaging and has caused all of the authors tremendous worry and concern. Since we were not given a chance to defend ourselves on the second peer review and our manuscript refused because of these accusations (since all other revisions were verbiage and extremely minor), we contacted Illumina (manufacturers of the HiSeq 2000 next generation sequencing platform that we used to sequence the genomes) in an effort to prove, once and for all, that the three genomes were single source and not contaminated. We spoke with two supervisors specializing in technical support for next generation sequencing. We asked them if it was possible to prove if there was contamination in a genome or not.  They immediately answered “yes”!  They told us that the average Q30 score for a genome was 85, but if there was contamination, which would cause the divergent sequences to compete against one another, that a contaminated sample would have a Q30 score of only 40 to 50.  A pure, single source sample would have a Q30 score of about 85.  When we checked our Q30 scores for the first read, our three genomes had Q30 scores of 92, 88 and 89 respectively.  The second read was a little lower 88, 84.25 and 83.66 but still very close to the average of 85.  The Q30 is the percent of the reads that have the statistical probability greater than 1:1000 of being correctly sequenced.  Therefore, with the help of the scientists at Illumina, it was determined that not only were the sequences from a single source, but the quality of the sequences were far above the average genome sequenced using their platform. I can furnish contact information if you desire it. We attribute the high quality of the genomes to the stringent extraction procedures utilized whereby the DNA was repeatedly purified.   This gave us greater than 30X coverage of the three genomes.  Furthermore, it supported our original findings of human mitochondrial DNA since the whole genomes yielded human mitochondrial DNA consistent with the original individual mtDNA genome sequencing.  The nuDNA findings were also supported in that there was novel primate sequence in the nuDNA. So, the original submission was indeed supported by the next generation sequencing that we included in the revised submission. The three genomes aligned with one another also supporting that all three genomes came from the same species and they were NOT contaminated. Most importantly, the Q30 scores absolutely disproved the reviewers’ assumption that the whole genomes were a mixture of human with animal DNA contaminants.  The summary of the next generation sequencing generated by the Illumina HiSeq 2000 sequencer is now furnished as Supplementary Data 7 to support this discussion that is now included in our manuscript, Lines 544-558.
3. The peer reviewers failed to even read the manuscript because we were asked for data or criticized for not having data that was already in the manuscript or supplementary information.

Bigfoot and the US Military

This is a very interesting video posted on YouTube. Our Military forces encounter Bigfoot on a somewhat regular basis. Most of our Military bases have large tracks of lands surrounding them that are off limits to civilians. The Bigfoot appear to know this and take full advantage by hiding and living in these "protected areas".

A couple years ago I worked with a lady whose husband was stationed at Fort Sill in Oklahoma. The base had a water shed that ran through the base in the "off limits to civilians" zone. This water shed connected a large wild area north of the base to agriculture fields south east of the base. This water shed also went under a major interstate providing a safe and hidden route under this heavily traveled road way.

The witness had routine visits to her on base housing facility. Her back yard ended where the edge of this water shed began. She witnessed them looking in the window at her and her children. She also could hear them and see their eyes glowing in the wood line from her back deck. The Bigfoot would also take her children's toys that were left out in the backyard overnight. During one encounter she had brought lunch out to her children, later they went into the house after eating leaving the plate of left over PB&J and chips. She went back outside later to retrieve the plate and found the food gone and a Bigfoot attempting to hide behind a small tree in her back yard. She went back into the house and the Bigfoot ran into the woods.

One more interesting observation she made was when her husband was at home the Bigfoot activity was almost non-existent. When he was deployed and away from home the Bigfoot activity was constant. She also noted that during her period they seemed to get more bold and come up to the house.

Bigfoot Captured on FLIR - Detials/Background

I have had time to organize my videos from the camping trip I took last week. Here is the background and setup concerning the FLIR footage I captured. 

The Top Ten "Bigfoot Shootings"

Chuck Prahl has a good post on alleged Bigfoot shootings. 

 Chuck’s Notes > Here I have put together from hours of research my Top Ten Bigfoot Shooting Reports. These are Amazing reports taken from as far back as a hundred years ago. I haven’t included the Justin Smeja bigfoot shooting not that I don’t believe but new evidence may be published soon that may give credence one way or another  and if so this list will be amended.

Click here to read