Comments on: Micah Hanks on Bigfoot DNA

By: Goodfoot

Goodfoot — Wed, 12 Dec 2012 01:03:42 +0000

If I were able to listen to COAST TO COAST AM more often (instead of nearly never), I probably would have heard of him before.

By: Ragnar

Ragnar — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 21:28:52 +0000

Who is Micah Hanks? I don’t know. Never heard of him, so I went and looked at some of his stuff. Seems to be all over the map from what I read on his website.

Here submitted for your edification. I note that his actual qualifications to comment on pretty much anything is not listed.

http://micahhanks.com/about/

By: Goodfoot

Goodfoot — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 17:17:52 +0000

I will freely admit that, upon seeing Hanky’s smirking picture, I summed him up prior to reading the piece. It’s a piece, all right… a directed HIT piece, and a poor one, at that. The stomach-churning syntax notwithstanding.

The two highly-charged weasel words are “escapades” and “rejected”, not to mention the aforementioned “fiasco”. Agenda “journalism”. Hey, WHO IS THIS GUY, AND WHY IS HE SMIRKING AT US? That’s the “I know it all” expression. Seen it before, where? Oh yeah, Joe Vialls.

By: faron27

faron27 — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 16:53:59 +0000

mixed feelings about this one but only time will tell.

By: Ploughboy

Ploughboy — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 16:41:18 +0000

I’d just weigh in to ask Mr. Hanks, what, exactly, does this sentence mean ?

“And of course, the most recent developments pertaining directly to Ketchum and her escapades are now purporting that the peer-review of her scientific presentation of DNA evidence for the existence of Sasquatch has been rejected.”

Come again there, huh?

The snytax makes my skull pound, but I also have to chuckle at this attempt to pass rank speculation and unsupported hearsay off as truth by tagging it as “developments” that apparently are capable of “purporting” something. Well, O.K. then…

Look, Melba Ketchum might be crazy as an outhouse rat for all I know, but until I see a communication from somebody outsider her project who has reviewed her methods and data, I’m in no position to draw any conclusions whatsoever. Neither is this guy.

By: Goodfoot

Goodfoot — Tue, 11 Dec 2012 02:16:49 +0000

Not to be mean, spiteful, or anything resembling it: who is this guy, and why is his equivocation of any real interest? (If you were interested by it, please forgive me, and explain why. Only if you want to.)

And using the term “fiasco”? Now, THAT’S premature, and a bit snippy to boot, if you ask me. Not that you did.

Unless I missed something this weekend (bad case of Redskins fever), this thing hasn’t proved a “fiasco” yet. Not even close.