tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post8122349917617024565..comments2024-03-12T03:23:42.976-04:00Comments on NeuroDojo: Sasquatch DNA?Zen Faulkeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07811309183398223358noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-12596489499734663802012-12-20T14:35:37.542-05:002012-12-20T14:35:37.542-05:00Skepticism is not debunking. Keep in mind the hist...Skepticism is not debunking. Keep in mind the historical fact that innumerable bogus papers have passed peer review, and some that have been rejected are now seen as breakthroughs. The a priori exclusion of certain topics (Sasquatch, chupacabra, not to mention silently flying triangles, all of which have a wealth of human testimony to bear them up) is not in keeping with authentic scientific methodology, in my opinion. Furthermore, the ad hominem argument against the researcher is fallacious; the value of Dr. Ketchum's paper is not in her person but in her recorded data and her analysis thereof. I look forward to the further development of this and other studies of creatures that are "forbidden" to exist, not just excluded as topics of scientific research.thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09220324411136333297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-15044047094074739062012-11-28T08:47:08.199-05:002012-11-28T08:47:08.199-05:00Robert Lindsay: Thank you for the corrections and ...Robert Lindsay: Thank you for the corrections and additional information.<br /><br />P.S.-- While part of me hopes that reviewers are extremely critical and prepared to reject the paper, another part of me hopes that this research is bulletproof.<br /><br />But for many reasons, I would not place my bet on this research being strong enough to convince the scientific community at large. Zen Faulkeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07811309183398223358noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-11373497694688857482012-11-27T23:58:35.035-05:002012-11-27T23:58:35.035-05:00There a few genuine scientists that have already a...There a few genuine scientists that have already accepted the fact Sasquatch indeed exists...Having the absolute privelege to personaly meet and research alongside Dr John Bindernagel(author of discovery of Sasquatch, rainbow books)..and viewing his carefully documented evidence..along with the many eyewitness accounts. Ive accepted the reality of its existance based on the evidence we already have.. I think we should let the study be reviewed before we are so quick to dismiss it.. and instead let this be the platform that unites the scientific community so that serious studies and discussions can take place based on all the evidence we have.Im confident that mainstream science is about to have its proverbial "EYES" opened and with this DNA study,it will be very difficult to dismiss as legend or hoax..Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11902541912840145965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-80840520885127556352012-11-27T15:13:41.086-05:002012-11-27T15:13:41.086-05:00That reported "F----" outburst from I Do...That reported "F----" outburst from I Doubt it is oddly juvenile, and hypocritical in light of what she said on the same page about being civil. She's alienating readers and dragging her own work down.edrich46noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-80770117001736865752012-11-27T14:11:32.099-05:002012-11-27T14:11:32.099-05:00'I Doubt It' here accuses the Ketchum stud...'I Doubt It' here accuses the Ketchum study of sordidness.<br /><br />From her page, 'Why I give up on Bigfoot sites and forums':<br /><br />#12 by Brian Dunning on April 3, 2012 - 12:49 pm <br /><br />"You’re going to stop visiting Bigfoot forums? I’ll believe it when I see it (like Bigfoot)."<br /><br /><br />#13 by idoubtit on April 3, 2012 - 7:14 pm <br /><br />"ARE YOU F[edited] KIDDING ME?<br /><br />BFF just added “premium memberships” today.<br /><br />That site is pathetic."<br /><br />Two posts later, I Doubt It commented:<br /><br /><br />#18 by idoubtit on April 7, 2012 - 8:22 am <br /><br />"[ . . . ]<br /><br />I don’t like that you treat us like we don’t know what we are talking about. So, I am not posting your comments. Please be more cautious during public discussions here, I try to keep it at a civil level. Thank you."<br /><br />I don't understand how "F[edited]" in block capitals demonstrates 'a civil level.' She's a geologist. You wouldn't expect that kind of language usage from someone highly educated.<br /><br />Reading through some of her material, she seems to not understand that Atheism is a belief system, that evolutionary theory is a theory, and so requires belief.<br /><br />In her comments she has been dismissive of amateur investigators. Amateurs can do perfectly good work. As much as 90% of astronomical discoveries are made by back garden amateurs with telescopes.<br /><br />A problem with professional skeptics is bias. If 'the unexplained' occurred to them personally, privately, because of bias, it's likely they would discount it, and not reveal to anyone that it had happened.<br /><br />Some science types treat science as Science--a religion. While they attack various religious people for their beliefs, they themselves are marching into universities and laboratories, which are institutions, like churches, with practices and theories which require belief and faith.<br /><br />Why be an extremist in either direction? With a name such as I Doubt It and a site, Doubtful News, you are advertising bias, showing that you would intentionally close your mind to that which doesn't fit the culture into which you've been indoctrinated.<br /><br />Anyone could just as easily adopt a moniker such as 'I Don't Believe You', create a newspage called 'Nothing is Real News', and invent the slogan:<br /><br />'Here at NRN, we place the dubious claims of professional skeptics under a critical lens.'<br /><br />There would follow pages and pages and hundreds of comments picking apart the methods of self-declared skeptics.Frank B.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-5712964999884940412012-11-27T13:46:44.958-05:002012-11-27T13:46:44.958-05:00Hello, it is not true at all that Robin Lynne is a...Hello, it is not true at all that Robin Lynne is a source of any of the DNA. Instead the DNA is from a wide of sources all over the US and Canada. It is not just from hair. There is blood, saliva and actually tissue from a dead Bigfoot that was used.<br /><br />The article appears to have failed peer review here in the US, is the best I can guess. It was probably at Nature from Feb 2011-Sep 2011, so the author is wrong that no journal editor would even send this out for review. It appears that Henry Gee himself did just that. The paper was handed back with "no testable hypothesis" and "no zoologist on board."<br /><br />From Sep 2011 until present it has been at one or more journals. It was handed back for four major rewrites and endless minor ones. It either failed in the end or Melba just got tired of waiting for Godot to publish the paper. She's taking it to Russia and it will be published in a Russian scientific journal. It's apparently been in review there and it looks like it will pass review. The topic is too hot and full of ridicule so it looks like no US journal will touch it for fear of reputation damage or humiliation.<br /><br />There is no good hard evidence that Robin Lynne has any Bigfoots on her property. Maybe she does, maybe she doesn't,who knows.<br /><br />Melba is not trying to make money off any documentary. That project is shelved.Robert Lindsayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16213140951444357431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-13121198333267147112012-11-26T20:42:39.124-05:002012-11-26T20:42:39.124-05:00Interesting. I thought that was a George Bernard S...Interesting. I thought that was a George Bernard Shaw saying. Maybe he stole it from the Chinese people.Marknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-65101190750401535802012-11-26T20:34:16.292-05:002012-11-26T20:34:16.292-05:00I Doubt It is a professional doubter. Bring her an...I Doubt It is a professional doubter. Bring her anything, her job is to doubt it.<br /><br />A professional Doubting Thomasina.<br /><br />She should remember the Chinese proverb:<br /><br />The person who says something can't be done, shouldn't interrupt the person doing it.<br /><br />Really, all professional doubters should be taught that proverb.<br /><br />It wouldn't hurt to review the parable of Doubting Thomas, either.<br />Chin-Leenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-21043729827267098462012-11-26T20:08:19.249-05:002012-11-26T20:08:19.249-05:00You pseudoskeptics have issues. You can't just...You pseudoskeptics have issues. You can't just sit back and wait for the paper to come out, can you. You just have to be disparaging. You people should try to find something constructive to do with your lives, rather than just trying to tear down everybody who is researching claims that you do not like.Marknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-69721239196734557452012-11-26T17:43:16.827-05:002012-11-26T17:43:16.827-05:00Over at Doubtfulnews.com, we take these dubious st...Over at Doubtfulnews.com, we take these dubious stories from the fringes and put them under a skeptical lens. <br /><br />I have a lot on the history of this story and various other Bigfoot claims that have come around. <br /><br />There is a LONG and SORDID history to Dr. Ketchum's study and its various partipants, promises and secrecy. I'm working on chronicling it for publication in a skeptical outlet. I Doubt Ithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09008137771147936137noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-47123080622178689412012-11-26T17:34:39.134-05:002012-11-26T17:34:39.134-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-12241679998631472492012-11-26T16:50:28.488-05:002012-11-26T16:50:28.488-05:00It's not really strange - the timing, I mean. ...It's not really strange - the timing, I mean. Some information already leaked by some dude named Igor. He was angry that it was taking so long. She, kind of, had to respond, given the circumstances.Marknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3522311.post-6034242120848975122012-11-26T15:44:13.776-05:002012-11-26T15:44:13.776-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com