[quote]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.
[/quote]
Source: [URL]http://www.dnadiagnostics.com/press.html[/URL]
I was very excited when I read this, but then I saw this article:
[quote]No, a paper has NOT yet been released with the results but because [URL="http://www.bigfootlunchclub.com/2012/11/david-paulides-releases-bigfoot-dna.html"][COLOR=#4f7e27]Igor Burtsev spilled the beans earlier[/COLOR][/URL] (he was VERY excited) in the press, Dr. Melba Ketchum has issued a press release regarding the results of the DNA study that she led that has been in process for 5 years.
From the press release:
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.
So, the claim is that, genetically, Sasquatch/Bigfoot is a human hybrid. Dr. Ketchum remarks that they must be recognized and protected as indigenous people.
What is wrong with story? Oh, where to begin…
We don’t know who the team of scientists is. Melba has been silent. The collected data is suspect, the analysis is suspect, the conclusions are suspect. EVERYTHING is suspect because there is no data for anyone else to examine, the procedure and results have not yet been published and there is NO OTHER reliable physical evidence, traces or history of such an indigenous people.
To make such an extraordinary claim is to put yourself out on such a long, unstable limb! It is not how science is done, it’s how pseudoscience is done. But, let’s just say that Dr. K has results and is confident in them. She sure is in a pickle now because there is still NO paper and no hint of when or where it will be published. Much is going on behind the scenes that the interested public is not privy to. To be practical, this announcement gets us absolutely NO further to a Bigfoot discovery than yesterday or the day before. It’s still vaporware. No paper, no data, no body, no Bigfoot.
As a background, this is a long and horribly confusing and ridiculous story about how and from whom the samples were collected, who is leaking info to whom, Melba’s encounters with a family of Bigfoots, firing of publicists, rumors of publishing in Nature, promises, promises, promises… All of that will be WIPED away if only there is produced actual solid evidence of the incredible claims. The current attitude of many Bigfooters is extreme skepticism of Dr. K’s claims. It’s just been too weird of a trip. It’s also been highly unprofessional the way the whole story has played out. And so this press release continues that trend.
Still waiting…[/quote]
source: [URL]http://doubtfulnews.com/2012/11/melba-ketchum-announces-bigfoot-dna-results-without-the-data/[/URL]
After reading that I was really a bit dissappointed, but then an update on the article!
[quote]There has understandably been some scientific interest in this announcement. It had many scratching their heads. They have begun to wade into the Ketchum study circus just now are discovering the long history of the project. They also have made some interesting observations. See this summary of comment clips.[/quote]
The summary:
[quote]First Bigfoot DNA "Peer Review" Results are In-- But, Not as Expected
The word peer review is in quotes in the title, because we are using it ironically and with reservation. We do not mean peer review in the scientific publication sense. We do mean, however, that scientific peers are interested in Dr. Melba Ketchum's Bigfoot DNA Press release. We have reactions from an invertebrate neuroethologist, a genome informatic expert, a DNA lab owner, and a professor of microbiology. There is a great consensus among these academics, they seem to have two reactions.
While intriguing, the press release seems pre-mature and the timing seems odd since the manuscript has not been published and the peer review has not been completed.
Dr. Melba Ketchum does have credentials, let's hope it is legit.
NeuroDojo, run by Zen Faulkes, is a popular award-winning neuroscience blog has this to say.
It’s not just the subject matter of the press release that is strange, though. There’s the little fact that it’s for a paper that is in review, not one that has been published. Usually, papers in review don’t get press releases, because goodness knows Reviewer Number 2 has taken a lot of manuscripts out of contention and they never see the light of day.
In fact, I have to admit: I am so pulling for Reviewer Number 2 to take this manuscript down. Preferably with sniper-style precision and finality. As one Twitter commenter said, this is something that most journal editors would not even send out for review.
NeuroDojo, seems to also be rooting for Dr. Melba ketchum.
That Ketchum is a published author on DNA techniques makes me think this is not a hoax. And I've smelled sasquatch hoaxes before...This feels much more like... overly enthusiastic interpretation, if I’m being charitable about it.
Dr. Mary Mangan of OpenHelix.com, has experience in the private and academic sectors of Genome Informatics, has this reaction:
It was irresistible. I had to read the release, and all I could think about was finding the Sasquatch Genome Browser. It eludes me right now.
Oh, I can’t wait to see this paper. For a laugh I searched PubMed to see what kind of Bigfoot data there is already, and to my surprise he’s in there. Of course, the paper is about the psychology of monster hunters. And also about the tension between “amateur naturalists and professional scientists”.
Roberta Estes founder of DNAeXplain was in yesterday's post, "DNA Consulting Company is Intrigued by Melba Ketchum's Bigfoot DNA." Her enthusiasm and caution for the the project is clear.
There has been no smoking gun. If this research is valid and passes peer review, it not only confirms that Sasquatch is real, it vindicates many of the people who have had “sightings” over the years. It becomes the smoking gun. But as with much science, it raises more questions than it answers.
Indeed, I look forward to seeing this published paper and I hope it is legitimate and not pseudo-science of some sort.
And finally we got an email from Tyler A. Kokjohn, Ph.D., Professor of Microbiology atMidwestern University.
It seems that we may have to wait for definitive information on the sequences. Clearly, many people are quite interested in the outcome and it is a bit frustrating to be teased...Please note that these questions can be answered without compromising the research paper now under peer review. Since the scientists elected to communicate with the public, they should be willing to offer clarifications and answer questions.
Dr. Kokjohn had a series of fascinating questions that I would hope the Melba camp could answer.
What method was employed to sequence the DNA? Some have interesting quirks.
Which gene(s) were sequenced, i.e., which genes did you use to decide the Bigfoot relationship to humans?
The statement was made that the mitochondrial genome is identical to human, but the nuclear DNA is distinct. Moreover, a 15,000 year divergence point is estimated. This is quite contrary to expectations. Usually, the genes in a mitochondrion will yield a ‘faster’ evolutionary clock than the nuclear genes (higher mutation rate), that is partially why mitochondrial genes are used for the rapid identification of species. It seems odd that the mitochondria sequence would be invariant. This requires an explanation.
How deep was the sequencing of the genes in question? To get at infrequent mutations, one must have gone over the same DNA multiple times to reach an accurate consensus. A single pass sequence will have many errors in it and comparisons based on it may inflate the apparent evolutionary distances. This is vital because Bigfoot and human sequences will be (apparently) VERY closely related. To get a feel for the challenges of working with closely-related species, search the work of Svante Paabo with Neanderthal DNA on PubMed.
Are the gene(s) you used for the Bigfoot-human comparisons protein coding? Would the sequence changes you found in the homologous genes yield amino acid codons that are synonymous (no amino acid change), substitutions (new amino acids) or nonsense (protein chain terminated)? This can help one decide whether or not the new sequence makes sense or contains deletions/insertions and other errors.
What was the nature of the sample from which DNA was obtained? Had it been exposed to the elements? How do you know it is from Bigfoot? If the sample is degraded, DNA sequences will likely exhibit alterations.
How did they avoid contamination with authentic human DNA?
So, in a manner of speaking, this is as close to a peer review for now. These are the initial reactions and questions of well-respected authorities; an invertebrate neuroethologist, a genome informatic expert, a DNA lab owner, and a professor of microbiology.
More questions then answers? What did the late Richard Stubstad know? Richard Stubstad claims to have worked on the first four of the 20 sequences Melba mentions in her press release.[/quote]
source: h[URL="http://www.bigfootlunchclub.com/2012/11/first-bigfoot-dna-peer-review-results.html"]ttp://www.bigfootlunchclub.com/2012/11/first-bigfoot-dna-peer-review-results.html[/URL]
First they announce there's life on mars, now they're saying bigfoot exists. November has been a really good month for news.
Come back when a credible source is reporting it
[QUOTE=jaykray;38611477]
First they announce there's life on mars, [/QUOTE]
That bit too
I'm confused
are they saying he still exists? or used to?
[QUOTE=killerteacup;38611533]I'm confused
are they saying he still exists? or used to?[/QUOTE]
The former I think, considering she's calling for them to have human rights
too much text to read for something about bigfoot, when it's obviously nothing anyway
I'll withhold judgement until I can read the scientific paper in a mainstream journal.
Not saying it's impossible, but they will need to move mountains to make this credible.
[QUOTE=killerteacup;38611586]I'm calling bullshit[/QUOTE]
Yeah, and with the scientists' surname being "Ketchum", I am definitely calling bullshit, especially given their glaring omission wrt to mDNA versus nuDNA. It sounds like an amateur who's heard that you inherit your mother's mDNA with little mutation assuming that this would be the same over 15000 years, which is complete horseshit.
I'd be interested if it were real, but this is so obviously hokey pseudoscientific bullcrap
[QUOTE=Craigewan;38611757]Yeah, and with the scientists' surname being "Ketchum", I am definitely calling bullshit, especially given their glaring omission wrt to mDNA versus nuDNA. It sounds like an amateur who's heard that you inherit your mother's mDNA with little mutation assuming that this would be the same over 15000 years, which is complete horseshit.
I'd be interested if it were real, but this is so obviously hokey pseudoscientific bullcrap[/QUOTE]
Maybe Ash didn't became a master after all?
You know why they put up news stuff like this? It's to increase the publicity and keep the Bigfoot legend alive longer which also means more tourism.
[QUOTE]“Our study has sequenced 20 whole mitochondrial genomes and utilized next generation sequencing to obtain 3 whole nuclear genomes from [b]purported Sasquatch samples.[/b][/QUOTE]
Where the fuck are those alarm bells?
[QUOTE]She began testing the DNA of purported Sasquatch hair samples 5
years ago.[/QUOTE]
"purported"
[QUOTE]Ketchum calls on public officials and law enforcement to immediately recognize the Sasquatch as an indigenous people:[/QUOTE]
lmao
[QUOTE]“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.[/QUOTE]
ahahahahahhahahaha
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wt8pN8qR-BQ&feature=plcp[/media]
Seems legit.
might not wanna watch this video at work or school btw.
[QUOTE=jaykray;38611477]First they announce there's life on mars, now they're saying bigfoot exists. November has been a really good month for news.[/QUOTE]
because a pile of steaming shit claiming bigfoot exists is sure good news
yup, we need to prove the loch ness monster exists now
yup, its not like the american northwest is completely unsuited to 3 metre tall apes who have to compete with bears
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;38611830]because a pile of steaming shit claiming bigfoot exists is sure good news
yup, we need to prove the loch ness monster exists now
yup, its not like the american northwest is completely unsuited to 3 metre tall apes who have to compete with bears[/QUOTE]
You've got to believe
looks like ash can really catch em all... or at least prolong the life of the bigfoot legend
There is a bigfoot in all of us.
[QUOTE]
First they announce there's life on mars[/QUOTE]
WHAT!? WHEN!?
[QUOTE=falcont2t;38612794]WHAT!? WHEN!?[/QUOTE]
The other day I think
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myrK3wCWY_M[/media]
I was listening to Coast to Coast the other night and John B. Wells had David Paulides on, who's written a few books on Bigfoot and was involved in the process surrounding the paper. If it is true then this could be massive. Perhaps it's just the big kid in me (I've always had a thing for cryptozoology) but I'd love for this to be true, however, the scientist in me has to remain sceptical. This isn't the first time these claims have been made.
[QUOTE=jaykray;38612814]The other day I think[/QUOTE]
show me the source of that, please, i mean, how is not everyone freaking out of such a big discovery?
i can believe thats true
Damn Samsquanch[B].[/B]
Everything in the usa.. aliens.. bigfoot.. what next? dun dun dunnn
A human/primate hybrid, eh?
. . .so, who fucked a monkey?
All I can think about when I hear 'Bigfoot' is that idiot on the Discovery Channel or History channel commercials for that Bigfoot hunting show.
"I DO BELIEVE THERE'S A SQUATCH IN THESE WOODS"
Uhhh
So where did they get DNA? Or do they even have DNA? I don't get it. It's an entire article about genome jargon and I don't understand where they are getting anything from.
Remember when those hunters stuffed a dead deer into a gorilla suit and claimed that they shot bigfoot?
I don't think this will end any differently.
[QUOTE=falcont2t;38613068]show me the source of that, please, i mean, how is not everyone freaking out of such a big discovery?
i can believe thats true[/QUOTE]
There was a thread about it in SH.
[QUOTE=jaykray;38614388]There was a thread about it in SH.[/QUOTE]
I just searched the last ten pages and didn't find anything.
[QUOTE=thirty9th;38613865]All I can think about when I hear 'Bigfoot' is that idiot on the Discovery Channel or History channel commercials for that Bigfoot hunting show.
"I DO BELIEVE THERE'S A SQUATCH IN THESE WOODS"[/QUOTE]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iwq1C5yUN4[/media]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
