 |
| Dr. Melba Ketchum head one of the two major Bigfoot DNA projects. |
“Genetically, the Sasquatch are a human hybrid with unambiguously modern human maternal ancestry. Government at all levels must recognize them as an indigenous people and immediately protect their human and Constitutional rights" --Dr. Melba Ketchum
Most likely due to yesterday's events. Today (11.24.2012), on her official Facebook page, Dr. Melba Ketchum posted a press release based on the Bigfoot DNA project she has been working on for the better half of the last decade.
In the release Dr. Melba Ketchum announces the sequencing of Bigfoot DNA, she notes that the nuclear DNA is human, there are also NON-human and NON-apes in the DNA. Read the whole thing below.
Also to be fair, at Bigfoot Lunch Club, we have been fairly critical of Dr. Melba Ketchum's approach read "Melba is a no show, then Literally Phones it in" and "Melba Ketchum Has a History of Failing to Deliver DNA Results". None the less, we still look forward to her results AFTER they have been peer-reviewed.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
‘BIGFOOT’ DNA SEQUENCED IN UPCOMING GENETICS STUDY
Five-Year Genome Study Yields Evidence of Homo sapiens/Unknown Hominin Hybrid Species in North America
Contact: Robin Lynne, media@dnadiagnostics.com, 231.622.5362
DALLAS, Nov. 24--A team of scientists can verify that their 5-year long DNA study, currently under peer-review, confirms the existence of a novel hominin hybrid species, commonly called “Bigfoot” or “Sasquatch,” living in North America. Researchers’ extensive DNA sequencing suggests that the legendary Sasquatch is a human relative that arose approximately 15,000 years ago as a hybrid cross of modern Homo sapiens with an unknown primate species.
The study was conducted by a team of experts in genetics, forensics, imaging and pathology, led by Dr. Melba S. Ketchum of Nacogdoches, TX. In response to recent interest in the study, Dr. Ketchum can confirm that her team has sequenced 3 complete Sasquatch nuclear genomes and determined the species is a human hybrid:
“Our study has sequenced 20 whole mitochondrial genomes and utilized next generation sequencing to obtain 3 whole nuclear genomes from purported Sasquatch samples. The genome sequencing shows that Sasquatch mtDNA is identical to modern Homo sapiens, but Sasquatch nuDNA is a novel, unknown hominin related to Homo sapiens and other primate species. Our data indicate that the North American Sasquatch is a hybrid species, the result of males of an unknown hominin species crossing with female Homo sapiens.
Hominins are members of the taxonomic grouping Hominini, which includes all members of the genus Homo. Genetic testing has already ruled out Homo neanderthalis and the Denisova hominin as contributors to Sasquatch mtDNA or nuDNA. “The male progenitor that contributed the unknown sequence to this hybrid is unique as its DNA is more distantly removed from humans than other recently discovered hominins like the Denisovan individual,” explains Ketchum.
“Sasquatch nuclear DNA is incredibly novel and not at all what we had expected. While it has human nuclear DNA within its genome, there are also distinctly non-human, non-archaic hominin, and non-ape sequences. We describe it as a mosaic of human and novel non-human sequence. Further study is needed and is ongoing to better characterize and understand Sasquatch nuclear DNA.”
Ketchum is a veterinarian whose professional experience includes 27 years of research in genetics, including forensics. Early in her career she also practiced veterinary medicine, and she has previously been published as a participant in mapping the equine genome. She began testing the DNA of purported Sasquatch hair samples 5 years ago.
Ketchum calls on public officials and law enforcement to immediately recognize the Sasquatch as an indigenous people:
“Genetically, the Sasquatch are a human hybrid with unambiguously modern human maternal ancestry. Government at all levels must recognize them as an indigenous people and immediately protect their human and Constitutional rights against those who would see in their physical and cultural differences a ‘license’ to hunt, trap, or kill them.”
Full details of the study will be presented in the near future when the study manuscript publishes.
###
I would be VERY VERY HAPPY to be proven wrong... however, it sounds like she just bought herself a few more months.
ReplyDeletewhy not just show us a little piece
Deleteof "mosaic" DNA on her webpage
I`m no expert but 15,000 years does not seem long enough for a species to evolve.
ReplyDeleteAnon, your correct, one of the shortest species diversions on record for a HUGE mammal is the Polar Bear, which evolved from brown bears (U. arctos) just 150,000 years ago. That's pretty quick and required dramatic climatic change in environment to make it happen.
DeleteHybrid. Not a separate species, but a sub-species capable of interbreeding with other hominins. Ancestral, maternal Homo sapien DNA with unique male progenitor DNA more distantly removed from other hominid lineages (Neanderthal, Denisovans). Within the last 30,000 years there may have been as many as 5 or 6 separate hominid lineages present at the same time...competing for survival, interbreeding, etc...
DeleteShe can keep on claiming whatever she wants. If her results are not accepted and published in a peer reviewed scientific journal they mean nothing.
ReplyDeleteDr. Meldrum has offered to have her work reviewed and published himself if she can't find any other scientific venue willing to do so. Let's hope that she actually has legitimate data, and that if she has been rejected outright in all her other attempts at publication, that she will take him up on his offer.
That's the rub! Peer review! All we have are words and assertions at this point.
DeleteYep Guy!
DeleteHere is an example of who the legitimate Scientific Community does NOT work:
"I would like to announce that I have irrefutable DNA evidence that proves that human beings are a hybrid species between Martians and Pleiadians. I will now self-publish that "data" in a non-peer reviewed non-scientific publication of my own devising and will start a fundraising campaign to help support and protect our new species status. All of you who dare to criticize or refute me or my claims are just haters who don't want the "truth" to be known.
Me, Self-Appointed Expert"
Melba Ketchum's big "announcement" means NOTHING. We know nothing more than we did this time yesterday. ANYONE can claim ANYTHING, but without peer review and consensus from the rest of the Scientific community it means NOTHING.
That should read "how" not "who", love my phone :)
DeleteHAHAHA Meldrum peer reviewing Ketchum. Talk about biased - two supposed scientists who both beieve in Bigfoot offering to confirm each other's BS. Objectivity is a joke.
ReplyDeleteCan you have a "peer review" through a magazine as described? Would you not want a peer review with individuals that are in your particular field of work? Would not a review by way of magazine be classified as a "public review"? Am I wrong on this?
ReplyDeleteJeffrey Teagle "Peer Reviewed Scientific Journals" are a mainstay of the legitimate Scientific community. Every field of study has at least one Journal dedicated to their research area, and this is where Scientists will submit their papers for publication. Other Scientists volunteer to review and critique these papers before they are accepted, and if something has not undergone rigorous Scientific review it will not be published. Other Scientists who may disagree with the findings of one researcher or group of researchers will then submit findings of their own for review. As long as something has been pursued and analyzed in a legitimate fashion it can be accepted for publication. Publication itself does not mean that what is contained in the paper will be accepted as absolute fact, but it is a needed step in the direction for an idea or concept becoming fact, or on the other hand being disproven.
DeleteThe Journal "Nature" is one of the best known and most prestigious Journals of this type if you would like to explore this concept further. http://www.nature.com/nature/index.html
Jefferey, your correct, peer review means just that. A paper on DNA sequencing and research, would be reviewed by other genetic experts, BEFORE the paper is published. Melba Ketchum has done three things that usually happen AFTER a peer=reviewed paper is published. In other words she has put cart before the horse.
Delete1. Announce formally the results of her work
2. Associate her name with an important discovery, thereby creating a permanent record.
3. Promote her research interests and attract additional funders
Also, has the supposed Ketchum DNA been compared to that of the work of Oxford University? Anybody on here know about any of that? The results SHOULD match right - with little to "0" deviation, am I wrong??
ReplyDelete
DeleteThe Oxford university Sykes study is still in progress so there are no results to compare with as yet.
Regarding matching it would depend on the source of the samples but a type match would be good yes.
The Oxford University data of Dr. Sykes is still under testing and analysis and has not been released anywhere for any such comparison to take place. Neither has Dr. Ketchum's actual data been released anywhere, only her interpretation of what the data mean.
ReplyDeleteGuy thank you for staying on top of this and this discussions are great but I don’t have much to say as there has been more gas released then information I will hold my opinion till the concrete dry’s. By the way you need to add these steps to you BF announcement:
ReplyDelete1. Announce formally the results of her work
2. Associate her name with an important discovery, thereby creating a permanent record.
3. Promote her research interests and attract additional funders.
I do have a question who are these so called team of scientists that she talks about in the very first sentence?
I'm confused by the tenor of these comments. I've seen much less skepticism for much more outlandish claims, in particular for the presence of Bigfoots in heavily populated eastern states like Rhode Island, upstate New York, and Vermont (and compared to Idaho or Oregon, yes, even Vermont is quite heavily populated). So what's the problem? A grudge with Ketchum? A possible threat to various other pet theories about the nature of Bigfoot?
ReplyDeleteThanks Anon, I would appreciate some of Melba'a surrogates to balance the "tenor of these comments". Any of Ketchum's team is welcome to counter the comments made here.
Delete"she notes that the nuclear DNA is human"
ReplyDeleteShe says that the mitochondrial DNA (coming from the mother only) is human, the nuclear DNA shows variations.
The most interesting part of Ketchum's statement is the 'angel DNA' part.
ReplyDeleteIt is the first step in empirical support for 'The Law of One' explanation
Please provide the exact quote where the term "Angel DNA" is used.
DeleteAnd if you cannot actually get anyone to stick their neck out a do a peer review , then what ?
ReplyDeleteIf in fact there are Bigfeet, we need to leave them alone, or else corrupt them. It would only be a matter of time before they were introduced to McDonalds. We'd end up with obese Bigfeet, riddled with high cholesterol issues. What's next? Bigfeet sitting in front of the TV, smoking a joint, munching on Little Debbies(sorry Mr Feet, Hostess went extinct). Of course we all know that marijuana leads to meth use. If that were the case, they'd no longer be a legend, because everyone would be seeing Bigfeet, they'd be bouncing all over the place on a meth high, drooling, and talking nonsense. No, we need to leave Bigfeet alone....
ReplyDeletebigfoot would be a burger king kinda guy
DeleteThe article fails to comment about the authenticity of the alleged DNA from the Sasquatch. For all we know She could have gotten it from Jack Black while tripping on shrooms.
ReplyDeleteGuy,
ReplyDeleteI already comented that it is a challenge to obtain a DNA profile from a field collected sample for any species (cat, horse, monkey, human, bigfoot, etc.). You may all have fun with this, but do not question credibility of Melba Ketchum. I wittnesed similar episode several years ago when a professor of Genetics at a major university in sequenced a hair that could not be placed within existing lineages, the press made such a fun of him that he never ever commented on his results nor he tryed to publish them. And by the way, peer review doesn't mean anything. I can give you an example of an article published in very famous journal by a famous and highly regarded scientist that was a simple replica of an article published in another (less famous) journal.
Personally, being one of those lucky ones to witness this grand creature, my hat is off to Dr.Ketchum for sticking her head out regarding this subject. There have been many of you that believe in this so called peer review to base a final answer to the sasquatchs' existance. What ever the so called out come or its' result these beings are a reality. To all you that wimp and cry regarding proof, none of you will be happy when it is in front of your face. So you may have to leave your square box and go out into the woods and wait til you are worthy of a visit. Good luck little pink monkeys.
ReplyDelete