The South American tourism guy still believes in Ketchum, something like a year after giving her 7 thou.
Well Jay Lamb, you will be among the first to know once thorough results are established from Lloyd Pye’s geneticist and Dr. Melba Ketchum.
OTL,S! continues to wonder whether or not Dr. Ketchum has opened up a new lab, having been booted out of the facility on Bear Drive in beautiful downtown Timpson, Texas way back at the end of summer 2012. She lives in rural Shelby County, just south of Timpson. So basically if she were having her mail delivered, it would be via Timpson address. Now, during her flurries of activities on television, she has claimed to be located in Nacogdoches, but we don’t find her in that city of 33,000. We did notice that on her cover letter to the board of the organization that publishes Nature Journal, she gave an PO box address in Garrison, just a hoot and a holler down the road, with its 868 god fearing souls. In fact, Garrison is so small that Google maps seems to have omitted some of the main streets.
Garrison, TX, pop. 868
Now, Garrison is in Nacogdoches County, so maybe that is where she got the “Nacogdoches” from. Does anyone know if she has set up a lab there? Or is she just trying to give the appearance of moving to a larger town by using a PO Box in Garrison?
Update of a previously quoted thread at Facebook, November 22:
Dr. Melba Ketchum, thank you for the reply. If it is not a lemur, then what prosimian does your study suggest it comes from? As far as I know (from studying anthropology), you need to have a cladogram representing close relatives and you don’t have that to support your argument. I looked at figure 16 and I don’t find it helpful for your proposed theory. It is not a representative phylogeny tree of close relatives. It is not a cladogram that shows which animals, or in this case, primates (simians) or prosimans, are related…
@Emerson This is the entire problem with the skeptics. When you look at the entire genome, the progenitor on the male side of the Sasquatch is completely novel and therefore flies in the face of evolution as we know it. I couldn’t believe it either but the results were confirmed by so many labs in blind studies that I know that they are correct. With that said, my favorite phrase these days is “it is what it is’. I label the unknown part as just that…unknown. The phylo tree is just for a portion of chromosome 11 and therefore doesn’t reflect the entire genome.
Melba Ketchum, Nov. 29 : There are a a lot of examples in the Old Testament of hybrid creatures such as satyrs. Some people that know the BF exist think that they are the giants in Genesis 6. In no way does their existence contradict God, only evolution.
oh….. well, then that’s no problem…its just disproving the theory of evolution. OK then…that probably accounts for this observation by Paul Daneker on November 19:
Was disappointed the National Geographic Program night before last failed to even mention your genome project, results of your studies and assertions of an unknown hominid in North America….
Bigfoot pareidolioger Scott Carpenter pretty much gets the idea of how science gets around to recognizing newly discovered animals:
With the majority of the Bigfoot World and Mainstream Science refusing to accept the Ketchum DNA Study and Dr. Sykes’ farce the “Bigfoot Community” is in a major funk. Some would even argue shock. Dr. Sykes managed to disappoint and anger all sides of the debate in the Bigfoot World. He was a “Universal Wet Blanket”. The Ketchum Haters, Ketchum Supporters, Bi-Pedal Ape, Human Hybrid, Paranormal Bigfoot, Underground Bigfoot, UFO Bigfoot, you name it and all factions were disappointed in the “findings” by Dr. Sykes.
This left the whole community with the collective realization that only a body will do. DNA studies will not do, High Definition Video will not do, multi-witness encounters will not do, footprints will not do, sound recordings will not do, only a Bigfoot laying on a slab for the world to dissect and examine will do. Though many like myself hate to admit it we all know this is the truth.
Not surprisingly, the “bigfoot community,” in spite of being forced to reject Ketchum and her paper, have become enamored of her “hybridization” idea as the explanation of why DNA from some samples thought to be that of “bigfoot” sometimes comes back modern human. In other words, they accept the Ketchum nonsense, the “kind of people” stuff, in order to have “SOMETHING DNA” to cling to.
Ketchum at Facebook:
After reading the new Nature news article about humans crossbreeding with other hominins, I just can’t understand why there is such an aversion to our study.
We guess she can’t understand that the journal she is quoting is the one that rejected her paper; and we guess she can’t understand why because she didn’t understand all those negative “peer reviews” she says she got from Nature. She didn’t show crossbreeding of humans with hominins. In fact, she didn’t even claim to have done so:
Linda Moulton Howe: DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT WOULD BE THE CLOSEST OF KNOWN PRIMATES TO THE UNKNOWN HOMININ MALE PROGENITOR?
MELBA KETCHUM: It’s headed a little more towards the lemur line, oddly enough. It is definitely NOT an ape. And it’s interesting that we found out that there is an extinct lemur that weighed 400 or 500 pounds. Also, they had opposable thumbs and hooded noses. It really freaked me out that we had lemur. I did not expect that (laughs).
Back to the Facebook post:
The findings are just like for humans with a percentage of Neanderthal DNA,
no, they aren’t. See the above quote re lemurs.
only our findings show the novel Sasquatch DNA to be predominant in the genomes, with the human component being the lesser contributor.
no, that’s not what you claimed…see above quote. And, it’s not what your data showed.
In other words, Sasquatch are Sasquatch,
whatever they are or aren’t, that is true.
with a little human remaining in them from the original crossbreeding long ago.
actually, a little human remaining in the samples from the accidental or purposeful contamination/degradation of the samples.
It is really simple to understand.
yup, it sure is. But not surprisingly, there are a few blind followers who haven’t.
Trying to establish a timeline for the events:
First: the date of the FAZE-JAMEZ.ORG domain:
Created On:09-Jan-2013 07:29:45 UTC; so this is 6 hours in advance of daylight savings time in the US Mountain time zone, or 11:29 pm on Jan. 8th, when the editor of JAMEZ, presumably, acquires this domain name.
From Scott Carpenter’s blog: late in the evening of Wednesday January 9th, 2013 I [?Carpenter] 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.
Jan 10: someone sends blogger Robert Lindsay a copy of the manuscript with the cover stating it was to be published at JAMEZ on Jan 11.
Next: a document from Jan. 10 that had been released by the Ketchum camp some time ago, now posted at Bigfoot Field Journal:
“The paper was in the hands of other reviewers now but enough had signed off on it to be approved.”
This seems to be a confirmation that “Larry” , having failed to obtain positive reviews of Ketchum’s manuscript within the Scholastica platform, was shopping around outside of the Scholastica platform, for reviewers that would agree to the newly-worded intermediate recommendation.
January 11: at 5pm EDT an embarrassed Robert Lindsay gives up the idea that the paper will be released that day.
What happened, that reduced “Larry” to tears on January 10, 2013, after the manuscript was given to Robert Lindsay? why was a lawyer involved? did someone spill the beans about the solicitation of multiple referees, using fake letterhead, to Scholastica before they could publish? Did Scholastica then boot the JAMEZ account? Did “Larry” then speak to his lawyer about publishing JAMEZ outside the Scholastica platform? did the lawyer then tell “Larry” that Scholastica could not be forced to publish the paper?
The truth will out. In any event, clearly JAMEZ was not a legitimate journal, did not have legitimate editorial guidance, and did not use legitimate procedures. Scholastica knew it, “Larry” knows it, and now we all know it.
In other news,
The FAZE JAMEZ public notice site is still down. OTL,S! notes this record, and says hmmmm….:
In other news,
A statement from Rhettman Mullis, the man who hosted DNA researcher Bryan Sykes during part of Dr. Sykes stay in the US, looking into the bigfoot story. Mr. Mullis has tried to inject himself into the recent Icon documentaries that failed to find evidence of bigfoot in Dr. Sykes research, but apparently failed, and he is bitter about it. Of course, Mr. Mullis had no role other than to collate some of the samples collected by various people around the country. He continues to identify with Dr. Sykes, and believe in bigfoot.
I do not know if there will be any special edit for the two-hour special that will play on the National Geographic channel on November 17. I will find out when we all do. While the quality of the show is good in terms of graphics and filmography, it is very clear that Icon’s agenda was to show the Bigfoot community is a collective of “wackos.” Bryan and I knew that they would attempt to do this.
Mr. Mullis is among the cultists who will persist in their beliefs regardless of continued and repeated failures of all efforts to produce biological evidence. He should be thankful that Dr. Sykes likely intervened to keep Mr. Mullis out of the programs.
OTL,S! notes that the FAZE-JAMEZ public notice site is down. We also should have previously noted that the notice was posted by some “Jane Neilson, Managing Director of JAMEZ.” How does JAMEZ have a managing director? To do what, exactly? OTL,S! is attempting to verify and contact this person.
In other news, we thought that Ketchum’s Facebook post regarding a “university genome center” doing analysis of “mummies” had been taken down, but perhaps that was just a mobile app fubar, as it is up at present.
OTL,S! notes this post from the Bigfoot Forums, by Tyler Huggins, a gentleman of integrity, in our view. First, a caveat: Our readers may share our initial impression: where could this information have come from? Scholastica? we doubt that. Our contacts with that group indicates that they do not engage in this sort of thing. Dr. Ketchum? hardly. One of her past or present supporters, members of her inner circle? possibly. The other alternatives would be a member of “Larry’s” camp, or perhaps “Larry” himself. We tend to favor the latter possibility, although this amounts almost to a confession of some fairly out-of-bounds conduct.
Mr. Huggins seems to be alleging that the editor of JAMEZ (he uses the pseudonym “Larry” to refer to the editor) went outside the bounds of the Scholastica publishing platform to solicit “passing” “peer reviews” for Ketchum’s paper after the manuscript received non-passing reviews within that system. So this is a duo of dastardly deeds, in our view. Not only did he keep casting his net for favorable reviews, one infers, but he did this using an email address that would suggest that it was from within the Scholastica platform. This would explain the wording in the fake document of the alternatives given to reviewers , who might not want to recommend either “accept or reject”. For reviewers who might think there was merit in the paper, instead of having the Scholastica’s ”intermediate” recommendation of “revise and resubmit”, they were given the alternative of “publish with revisions”, which almost sounds like acceptance.
If Mr. Huggins allegations are true, then “Larry,” who by all accounts has no qualifications to be the editor of a scientific peer-reviewed journal, has flagrantly violated what we would consider to be some of the most basic ethics and duties that one would have expected of such an editor. Not to mention whatever obligations he may have had to Dr. Ketchum. An editor whose goal it was to obtain a pseudo-passing review could theoretically contact all the past and present biologists in North America and ships at sea, and finally find some whacked out drug addict with degree in alfalfa horticulture from Des Moines Farm Science Upstairs University and Barber College, who has a cell phone, living on the streets of Baltimore, and who would emerge from his coma long enough to silence his phone by checking a box in an email.
Larry was looking for alternate ways for Melba to achieve a pass from peer reviews, since traditional methods were resulting in … for lack of a better word, “fails”. They would send it back each time without passing it. Larry decided that a less restrictive, more open forum where anyone (preferably WITH CREDENTIALS) could review the work, would be more likely to end up with someone “passing” the paper/study.
However, the people that reviewed it were more credentialed than expected, and even this ‘less stringent/less restrictive’ method of peer review failed to elicit the desired “passing” reviews.
Larry was in no position to review it himself. He made out like he could read FASTA files the way Cipher could read code in the Matrix (“I don’t see the code, I just see Blonde, brunette, redhead…” = “I don’t see FASTA files, I just see wet nose/dry nose, otolemur, primate”). Sykes himself likely can’t read FASTA files like that – certainly the many geneticists that I dealt with weren’t able to do that, and Larry was nowhere near even being a biologist, let alone a geneticist. Anyways, I digress. Point is - no one, not Larry and not any of the “peer reviewers” in this ‘open source’ format “passed” Melba’s paper.
Scholastica has stated that the “review” paper sporting its name is a fabrication and that it doesn’t “review” papers or studies. Larry was incapable of reviewing or passing it, and none of the peer reviewers passed it. The only person that I know of that thought the paper was sound, was Haskell Hart - Hart has since reversed himself, and has gone to great lengths to now have a peer review done on his own paper that disproves Melba’s conclusions.
The plot thickens.
The purported identity (and certain contact information) of the “editor” of JAMEZ was posted at a at least two “Bigfoot” related internet forums (The Bigfoot Forums aka BFF (now removed by request of the individual), and Sasquatch Forum) by anonymous posters. This identity was posted previously at the site “Bigfoot Evidence.” OTL,S! will not comment on the accuracy of this identification at this time.
OTL,S! has been in contact with a representative of the JAMEZ-FAZE website, and has reason to believe that this person is a representative of the editor of JAMEZ. We inquired about the fake document, and received this reply from a person unknown to us, who did not identify herself as an attorney. We believe this statement neither admits nor denies anything about the document, other than claiming to keep reviewers and their comments confidential. We’re not sure why we chose to print it other than the fact that it’s slightly less boring than the phone book:
JAMEZ utilized https://scholasticahq.com/ platform to support a structured form and efficient process for our referees. JAMEZ ensured no competing interests existed between referees and author(s). The process included an option for referees to provide feedback and raise issues to author(s). An important part of the process included confidential comments to the editor- these comments were never shared with the submitting author(s) and as our site indicates at http://www.faze-jamez.org, peer review comments and recommendations to the editor(s) were never transferred to another organization or individual. Though referee comments, remarks, and recommendations intended for editor(s) were reserved for the confidential section of the https://scholasticahq.com/ form; referees that may have chosen to provide their comments to the author(s) would have done so honestly in the spirit of peer-feedback and improvement. It is crucial for any author or authors to understand that frank and honest feedback should never be misconstrued as unfair criticism.
At JAMEZ, the referee process is strictly confidential and we expected the treatment of such by referees. The referee process required that information a referee may have gained in the peer-review process be kept strictly confidential. Therefore, we must assume referees maintained the integrity of the process and any claims that a document was “leaked” by a referee is highly unlikely and should be treated as suspect. Likewise, JAMEZ very seriously and painstakingly ensured the privacy and anonymity of referees. If a referee chose to provide comments to the author(s), the referee would have made that choice freely through the https://scholasticahq.com/ form. Therefore, we defer to them as it relates to the transmitted documents you are referencing.
OTL,S! has learned from a reliable source that the JAMEZ account was terminated by Scholastica not long after it was originated, after complaints were lodged about JAMEZ. We hope to have more information soon on whether the fake peer review email was the cause or the result of such action by Scholastica. Either way, it appears from our vantage point that someone was playing fast and loose with the Scholastica brand, in an effort to manufacture some evidence of a passing peer review. Whoever was behind this, it seems to us, has committed an egregious bit of fakery, which has now ensnared not only the perpetrator(s), but also Scholastica, the many authors of the paper, the sample submitters, Wally Hersom, and anyone else who had faith in Dr. Ketchum’s study and in the integrity of the scientific peer review system.
We hope that the “editor” of JAMEZ and Dr. Ketchum will choose to be more forthcoming about what happened. The identity of the reviewers need not be an issue; they can easily be redacted. So can the content, for that matter. So let’s not hide behind that flimsy excuse, shall we?
The truth will out. OTL,S! is losing patience.
Scholastica at Facebook confirms that the email “peer review” document is not from their system:
CLICK TO ENLARGE
Scholastica is a platform. Here’s what it does:
You have an idea for a journal.
You go there to get a “journal in a box”. Plug and play.
You register your name, the name of your new journal, and they provide all the forms and mechanisms to call for papers, invite editors, and recruit reviewers, send and receive forms and emails, etc. For every manuscript submitted to your new journal, you pay ten bucks to Scholastica. Then you find reviewers, and start pushing buttons to send and receive reviews, push more buttons to send selected parts of the reviews to the author, you as editor decide whether to publish it. When you have enough papers for an issue, then you just push another button, and there it is, your first issue. Your subscribers can just go there and read it.
Here are some screen shots we obtained last spring at Scholastica, of forms and registrations that had been set up for JAMEZ.
Here’s the call for papers:
Here is a screen shot of Melba Ketchum who registered as an editor, don’t know why she did that.
Here is Casey Mullins, registered as a staff member of a the supposed foundation that owned JAMEZ:
So the documents for the individual journals (there are dozens “hosted” at Scholastica) all flow through Scholastica to and from the dozens of editors. Scholastica doesn’t decide anything or review anything. They just organize and expedite and put it all together.
The strange case of Texas Doctor of Veterinary Medicine Melba Ketchum, and her claims of discovering bigfoot DNA continues to amaze.
This long-running saga has been chronicled at Doubtful News and documented here, the latter now being mind-numblingly long and filled with stories of misconduct, misunderstanding, mysterious beings, misapplication of science and misleading claims.
We have recently discovered that Ketchum’s claim that her manuscript
Ketchum, Melba, Patrick Wojtkiewicz, Aliece Watts, David Spence, Andreas Holzenburg, Douglas Tolar, Thomas Prychitko, Fan Zhang, Sarah Bollinger, Ray Shoulders & Ryan Smith. 2013 Novel North American Hominins, Next Generation Sequencing of Three Whole Genomes and Associated Studies. Denovo, Accelerating Science 1(1, Supplemental)
passed scientific peer review is based on an apparently fake document, which is, at the moment, still posted at the Bigfoot Field Guide website.
Bare bones saga:
Ketchum claims that she submitted her manuscript to the newly-announced Journal of Advanced Multidisciplinary Explorations in Zoology (JAMEZ) in January, 2013 (JAMEZ was organized on the Scholastica academic publishing platform, which provides forms, mechanisms and notifications for authors, editors and reviewers). Ketchum’s claim is that the paper passed peer review there, but the editor and the editor’s attorney decided not to publish it (In fact, JAMEZ never published anything, and was anonymous except for one supposed employee who seems to have vanished; and we don’t know who the editor was, or whether there was an editorial board, etc, etc….so there is no proof that it was actually a legitimate peer reviewed journal). Ketchum says that she then “acquired” the JAMEZ, in order to “preserve” the supposedly legitimate peer reviews. She now says that, in this transaction, “monies” were given to the JAMEZ ownership, though not by her. So the story barely hangs together, and rested solely on Ketchum’s say so, until the present document appeared.
Subsequently, the paper was published, with help from former staff of JAMEZ, as the only article in the only issue of what is claimed to be a scientific online journal, “DeNovo: Advancing Science”. The publisher was a new entity owned and operated by the person who was acting as Ketchum’s spokesperson. No claim was made that DeNovo was itself a peer-reviewed journal. Rather, Ketchum’s claim that her paper passed peer review is apparently based entirely on the JAMEZ experience and on her claim of “acquiring” some rights from JAMEZ. Recently, a “leaked” document was posted at Scott Carpenter’s Bigfoot Field Guide, purported to be a peer review document from the JAMEZ/Scholastica, which Dr. Ketchum has vouched for as authentic.
This is a fake email document.
This purported peer review email is not a communication sent by Scholastica, the publishing platform for JAMEZ…. we don’t know what it is, but we have the evidence that it isn’t that. And as this document goes into the dumpster, so, seemingly, does Dr. Ketchum’s already very wobbly evidence that her manuscript ever passed peer review.
Here’s the introduction to the section where Mr. Carpenter published the fake email:
We took a close look at what has been assumed to be an authentic document, purportedly from the journal that Dr. Ketchum says gave her manuscript passing reviews (others disagree). We thought, as we looked at it, that the email address was wrong, the capitalization was wrong, the italicization was wrong, the syntax was wrong….it was just WRONG!
To confirm our suspicions, we sent the image from Mr. Carpenter’s blog to Scholastica, along with our old screenshot of Scholastica’s peer review form for comparison. Here they are, cropped a bit, side by side (click to enlarge):
You can see as well as we can that they aren’t the same; note the supposed Scholastica email address on the left, ending in “hp”.
The folks at Scholastica were happy to clarify matters; click to enlarge; note the actual Scholastica email address at the end, ending in “hq”:
This supposed evidence that Melba Ketchum’s manuscript,
Ketchum, Melba, Patrick Wojtkiewicz, Aliece Watts, David Spence, Andreas Holzenburg, Douglas Tolar, Thomas Prychitko, Fan Zhang, Sarah Bollinger, Ray Shoulders & Ryan Smith. 2013 Novel North American Hominins, Next Generation Sequencing of Three Whole Genomes and Associated Studies. Denovo, Accelerating Science 1(1, Supplemental).
passed peer review at JAMEZ is a fake, as it did not come from the Scholastica platform as is implied by the email address.
We don’t know who perpetrated it, and would certainly welcome any additional information on this matter.
So now we are once again without any tangible evidence to support Ketchum’s peer review claim. That isn’t science.