These type of DNA results seem to have particular difficulties. For years nothing was identified as new then in 2001 Professor Bryan Sykes was reported as finding one sample of primate DNA new to science along with two results for bears, one of which appeared to be a new sub-species . He later stated that the new primate result in fact was incorrect as the sample had been too small which would give a crazy result. I think he might like to review his result if Dr Ketchum’s results also turn out to be strange.

Problems were also found with orange pendek results from Dr Lars Thomas and now there appear to be something special or strange about results from samples submitted to Dr Ketchum as bigfoot.

Dr Ketchum first positive result was on a Josh Gates sample in 2009 when she described the DNA result from a hair sample he provided as from a large unknown primate in the human sequence (not sure what this means). She suggested DNA results like these could be used to establish a new species.

Certainly it will take time for Dr Ketchum’s work to go through the hoops and be released. I think she is the first to undertake peer review and its going to be difficult especially if she is up against some of the sillier sceptics. Meanwhile one should keep an open mind and wait with some moderate excitement and much more hope than say there is with the ‘hobbit’ DNA being extracted.

They blew it in my mind….perhaps patents, genome companies, etc can all be argued within “excellent science” but dead mom and baby BF’s cannot….
They blew it, every professional that handled or tested that “steak” with knowledge of source and sat on the information..blew it in my mind. It will be difficult to argue altruistic science with that choice…we will hear about Gov coverups or whatever to justify…..and in my mind if the Gov really wants covered up? Well, contact them first or you are your own personal Wikileaks.

But, this is America. where a sleazy lawyer can tell you, “Don’t worry about it, you will make so much dough, the fines, damages, anything they throw at you…peanuts, just pay.

Lawyers ethics. I am unable to ascertain if any lawyer besides Ketchum’s is advising anyone….I hope that is not the case….

again no glasses and not too interested in editing (btw..today 70% of work force requires near vision, 20 years ago only 23%)

prior to 2009 whatever DNA ketchum saw was intriguing, she confesses, and appears to have scientific curiosity.
Finally, the BF sighs, someone to take testing all the way through….
The toenail went from a wildlife forensic lab in early may 2009 to Ketchum when that lab’s testing reached it’s limit…(see Biscardi’s AZ story).
Initially one only heard about Ketchum somewhat in the same sentence as Meldrum…I think the Destination Truth or such TV show ?
And then for a time it seemed there were no special parties to the study..Erickson was talking, Paulides, and so on and all seemed to be in friendly competition..agreeing to come under a scientific study…
But then things change….by 2011 summer ketchum seems inaccessible and Paulides the spokesman for the Project, and goes so far to call it his project. And the resulting arguments on net who was there first (sounds like the TV show to me..anyway) seems Paulides won b/c he is the one to announce in Jan 2011 paper will be out this year….
Well what’s that say? Certainly by early 2011 or the end of 2011 Ketchum say BF’s as a sub-species or closely related to humans. Makes sense then the Paulides connection.
But, the scientific curiosity so many BFers signed up with seems to have morphed into serious commercial interests: as witnessed (if true) with leaks on registered domains (feralhumanproject) and Paulides Sasquatch Genome Project…..a
The other participants no longer in the know..but feeling like Paulides is, and them still waiting on sample results (or in some cases samples back) begin to get fidgety..no one likes to be outside the circle…especially went you already paid.
Time is going so slow for those waiting… EP on footage since 2005 and samples since late 2009 or early 2010…..then
what? Some weird story about shooting a Mom and Child Sasquatch…WTF? The story gets no traction for four blogs…then finally late spring 2011 it begins to take off. By summer 2011, 320 comments on Lindsay’s blog…and the story won’t die

the thing is..if untrue Ketchum could have dispelled ages ago…so something is “true” and it doesn’t sound pretty. I left OP out above intentionally…as providers..just too much spin coming from that groups..will just have to see the truth on that.

So, perhaps those guarded now that sung praises earlier see…it isn’t altruistic scientific curiosity as they hoped..or excellent science..but, a bit more self serving…apparently a bid to begin and center a Genome Project for Feral Humans…talks, conferences, etc and perhaps even some patents for PCR amplification or something? And perhaps disregard for the BFers themselves..who hang on her every FB word?

Who can back a secret that might include dead BF’s over a year ago and no disclosure? it seems ketchum is simply a hub thru which samples travel to other labs which send results back (apparently testing blind?)…so we’ll see.

If the paper gets traction we shall have many choices to send DNA.
ago
So, prudent folks are waiting to see the goods…

is early, no glasses, lots of typos I am sure, and no interest in editing…no disrespect intended

Many of those people have either spun 180′ or are notable by their absence. Odd.

1. There is a DNA study that has been on-going since at least 2009, in that by about that time Ketchum felt she had evidence of a Bigfoot (radio interview with Paulides – Erickson calls in I think) which had involved her a year or so prior thru a TV show..
2. Contributors to the study are often identified through their role as go between rather than actual sample procurer,. Larry Jenkins of AZ found the toenail submitted to Ketchum in 2009 via Biscardi. Local news ran stories and photos, perhaps even prior to Biscardi’s arrival. Representation of the toenail then became a typical BF competition, not sure who is the “credible rep” now.
3. On radio Paulides, at about that time, claimed reluctantly to have ‘some samples” in w/o being specific (he may have said bone) b/c Erickson usurped the show and claimed much more in the way of samples and video.
4. H. Farenbach (sp?) in about winter 09/10 was giving lectures at an adult community program and discussed the “Kentucky Project” and seemed close to the information and also that the project was credible and EP had tissue and blood samples that were “good”
5. sometime in early 2009 or late 2008 a video surfaced on web for about a week with resolution perhaps about 380p of what looked like a slender BF. perhaps teenager, pick up and lick a plate. The area was wooded, but the trees seemed young and there seemed to be a worn path to a table or bait station down which the camera was aimed. It also appeared to be dusk or dark, little color in the version I saw. (I saw it and thought not much since my own video was shot just about that time and I was not aware of BF “crowd or evidence” prior to late 2008 – so I had no idea what EP was). The video was pulled under threat of lawsuit..I believe Woolheater was the poster w/o NDA
6. Many appear to have viewed the footage and given thumbs up, although i don’t recall if I ever saw a first person quote on that from Bindernagel or someone others claims to have seen all the footage.
7. Contributions to the study accelerated after the radio show with Paulides, but also notably with Biscardi’s post on his website of Ketchum’s email and address and entire “Arizona Story” – worth the trip to find on his site.

My count of submissions known based on what I consider reliable internet news (hahahah) is :

Paulides – a few
EP – a handful
Larry Jenkins – toenail
Larry Surface – hair
JC Johnson – tissue, blood
Ruggs – the tooth (might have that wrong)
Okla BF groups…I don’t follow but their forums alive with results early and reported by “Ed Smith”

there are many more, but these are all self confessed.

Provenance will be important and chain of custody. Perhaps for Larry Jenkins the long list of subsequent handlers won’t be an issue b/c his sample allows for deep extraction. Also, JC Johnson’s skunk/pipe video records collection..what else he has I don’t know. Larry Surface has the NV video recently, of general BF activity in his area, unknown if resolution, etc adequate.

So, it sounds like EP still holds the HD video cards and perhaps collection records, enough samples to make a significant credible contribution to the study.

If we “try” the samples and provenance based on character of individuals involved, or partial data in advance..well that would just be weird, if the evidence itself is distinguishable from a hoax. So, I want to see the data! It matters not to me, the names attached so much to the chain of custody, as the circumstance of finding, supporting evidence, no one will accept anecdotal or witness testimony, so I hope the hard evidence is persuasive and the differences in the genome adequate to overcome persuasive counter arguments.

I did find a journey through the writings and comments of Janice Carter, Mary Green, and a particular blogger in Canada recently on the topic (can’t recall name..sasquatch something or other) interesting…and those combined with the other random posts on the net seem to, in essence give a rather deep picture.

As for Erickson himself? rich or poor, nice or mean, honest or not….who cares, just get the footage out and the details, and let the world pick it apart…it will stand or not.

I think we, at least in the Bf community, will be happy to finally see it.

Bad science is bad science. That’s what this has been, from word one.

I stick to the real scientists on this topic.

Why does Biscardi continue to get the attention of researchers? Five minutes of due diligence should be enough to convince any sane person to avoid the possibility of being linked with that circus in any way.