Bigfoot News
Bigfoot Evidence
Bigfoot Evidence
RSS feeds


Yahoo! 
MSN 
AOL 
Netvibes 
Bloglines 



The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Page 7 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  CMcMillan on Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:50 am

No it won't.
You are thinking LEMUR
If you look at the line Both Ape and Lemur evolved from the same primate in the evolutionary tree.



It is possible the Male lived between 70 and 50 million years ago and didn't evolve into the small lemur.
At around the 20 to 10 it mated with a Human. It created an offspring that we know know as bigfoot.

Again we only have 3 samples to tell the story we would need much more testing to verify this.
And we would need to figure out the tree.

avatar
CMcMillan

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2012-08-05
Location : USA CT

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  Squatchmaster G on Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:58 am

CMcMillan wrote:It is possible the Male lived between 70 and 50 million years ago and didn't evolve into the small lemur.
If it hadn't yet evolved into lemurs then Ketchum wouldn't have found any lemur-like indicators in the nuDNA.

CMcMillan wrote:At around the 20 to 10 it mated with a Human.
For a start there weren't any humans 20 to 10 million years ago. Secondly, according to Ketchum the male progenitor had to have mated with a human within the last 15,000 years.

avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  CMcMillan on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:11 am

Yes she would have found Lemur like
look at the Tree once you jump to the line the DNA would be lemur like.

If not then this tree is completely wrong and all evolution is wrong since it who we trace some of this stuff.


avatar
CMcMillan

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2012-08-05
Location : USA CT

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  Squatchmaster G on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:14 am

CMcMillan wrote:Yes she would have found Lemur like
look at the Tree once you jump to the line the DNA would be lemur like.

If not then this tree is completely wrong and all evolution is wrong since it who we trace some of this stuff.

Do me a favour and draw a line on that tree you posted where you think the evolutionary line of the male progenitor would have been.
avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  CMcMillan on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:16 am

Yes my date is wrong but:

It is apparent that both the complete replacement and the regional continuity models have difficulty accounting for all of the fossil and genetic data. What has emerged is a new hypothesis known as the assimilation (or partial replacement) model. It takes a middle ground and incorporates both of the old models. Gunter Brauer, of the University of Hamburg in Germany, proposes that the first modern humans did evolve in Africa, but when they migrated into other regions they did not simply replace existing human populations. Rather, they interbred to a limited degree with late archaic humans resulting in hybrid populations. In Europe, for instance, the first modern humans appear in the archaeological record rather suddenly around 45-40,000 years ago. The abruptness of the appearance of these Cro-Magnon people could be explained by their migrating into the region from Africa via an eastern Mediterranean coastal route. They apparently shared Europe with Neandertals for another 12,000 years or more. During this long time period, it is argued that interbreeding occurred and that the partially hybridized predominantly Cro-Magnon population ultimately became modern Europeans. In 2003, a discovery was made in a Romanian cave named Peştera cu Oase that supports this hypothesis. It was a partial skeleton of a 15-16 year old male Homo sapiens who lived about 30,000 years ago or a bit earlier. He had a mix of old and new anatomical features. The skull had characteristics of both modern and archaic humans. This could be explained as the result of interbreeding with Neandertals according to Erik Trinkaus of Washington University in St. Louis. Alan Templeton, also of Washington University, reported that a computer-based analysis of 10 different human DNA sequences indicates that there has been interbreeding between people living in Asia, Europe, and Africa for at least 600,000 years. This is consistent with the hypothesis that humans expanded again and again out of Africa and that these emigrants interbred with existing populations in Asia and Europe. It is also possible that migrations were not only in one direction--people could have migrated into Africa as well. If interbreeding occurred, it may have been a rare event. This is supported by the fact that most skeletons of Neandertals and Cro-Magnon people do not show hybrid characteristics.

http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_4.htm
avatar
CMcMillan

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2012-08-05
Location : USA CT

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  Squatchmaster G on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:20 am

CMcMillan wrote:Yes my date is wrong but:

It is apparent that both the complete replacement and the regional continuity models have difficulty accounting for all of the fossil and genetic data. What has emerged is a new hypothesis known as the assimilation (or partial replacement) model. It takes a middle ground and incorporates both of the old models. Gunter Brauer, of the University of Hamburg in Germany, proposes that the first modern humans did evolve in Africa, but when they migrated into other regions they did not simply replace existing human populations. Rather, they interbred to a limited degree with late archaic humans resulting in hybrid populations. In Europe, for instance, the first modern humans appear in the archaeological record rather suddenly around 45-40,000 years ago. The abruptness of the appearance of these Cro-Magnon people could be explained by their migrating into the region from Africa via an eastern Mediterranean coastal route. They apparently shared Europe with Neandertals for another 12,000 years or more. During this long time period, it is argued that interbreeding occurred and that the partially hybridized predominantly Cro-Magnon population ultimately became modern Europeans. In 2003, a discovery was made in a Romanian cave named Peştera cu Oase that supports this hypothesis. It was a partial skeleton of a 15-16 year old male Homo sapiens who lived about 30,000 years ago or a bit earlier. He had a mix of old and new anatomical features. The skull had characteristics of both modern and archaic humans. This could be explained as the result of interbreeding with Neandertals according to Erik Trinkaus of Washington University in St. Louis. Alan Templeton, also of Washington University, reported that a computer-based analysis of 10 different human DNA sequences indicates that there has been interbreeding between people living in Asia, Europe, and Africa for at least 600,000 years. This is consistent with the hypothesis that humans expanded again and again out of Africa and that these emigrants interbred with existing populations in Asia and Europe. It is also possible that migrations were not only in one direction--people could have migrated into Africa as well. If interbreeding occurred, it may have been a rare event. This is supported by the fact that most skeletons of Neandertals and Cro-Magnon people do not show hybrid characteristics.

http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_4.htm

Let me show you something:


See that green line? The male progenitor would have had to have come from somewhere along there for lemur-like indicators to show in Ketchum's research.

See the red line? The tiny tiny red line? That's the archaic and modern humans that your quote mentions. Only species in that red section would have any chance of interbreeding with a modern homo sapiens and creating a viable hybrid species.
(Note that this tree is missing a lot of detail and there should be branches for the other apes near that red line. They would not be able to successfully interbreed with humans.)

Ketchum's male progenitor is a long long long way from that red line.
avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  CMcMillan on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:22 am

Seriously your that Blind to see the where the Single primate split ?
You assumption is that some creature couldn't have stayed in its current form from the past when the dna would have shown similar to lemur. That it wasn't living and surviving. You are also assuming that this "Male" was not living in what we know know as North America. Where it is possible it was.
Many evolutionists are looking at the assimilation model. That we all inter mated with our ancestors. Neanderthal cro-mag etc... So it is possible that this "Male" was pure from the past untouched. We could just create another branch where it didn't evolve into the big lemur or down to the small lemur.
It could have survived and evolved differently. Just as we did from our primate origins.
avatar
CMcMillan

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2012-08-05
Location : USA CT

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  CMcMillan on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:24 am

No you are incorrect It doesn't HAVE too.
She said it leans to the Lemur.
you are taking the fact that the Line when it broke that the original Primate could have looked more Lemur in DNA. or it was in the small time of the split. where we both shared same ability to mate and produce viable offspring.


avatar
CMcMillan

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2012-08-05
Location : USA CT

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  CMcMillan on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:31 am

See my belief is we don't know enough to say it absolutely can not happen.
Like i said evolutionist don't believe what the genetics say happened. that we interbred with our ancestors.

So do we accept DNA or do we take the word of people looking at bones and hypothesizing stuff that happened.

You can sit here and claim well Science says this. But currently Science is still Debating what and who were mated with.
So who knows maybe some Old Primate with more Lemur looking DNA could mate with modern humans.
You can not be 100% sure or even 90% sure.







Last edited by CMcMillan on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:34 am; edited 1 time in total
avatar
CMcMillan

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2012-08-05
Location : USA CT

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  Squatchmaster G on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:33 am

A creature from 70 million years ago that is the ancestor of lemurs and humans wouldn't be able to interbreed with either modern lemurs or modern humans. For anything to successfully interbreed with a modern homo sapiens it has to come from that little red line I drew or it wouldn't be biologically similar enough. Even if it could produce offspring they would be sterile and they wouldn't create a new species.

If you think otherwise then I'd like to see some sources to back up your opinion. The quote you posted discussed interbreeding only within the little red line.
avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  CMcMillan on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:35 am

You do not know if it could,
We have no further evidence to support either claim.


Again unless you lived at that time you don't know.
For all we know Melba discovered in her testing that what you know is wrong.
avatar
CMcMillan

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2012-08-05
Location : USA CT

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  Squatchmaster G on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:39 am

CMcMillan wrote:You do not know if it could,
We have no further evidence to support either claim.

I have a whole bunch of evidence to support my claim. Literally thousands of years of people breeding animals and then hundreds of years of biologists studying interbreeding, fertilization, embryogenesis, developmental biology, genetics, etc etc etc.. The inability for organisms that are not extremely closely related to create hybrids is very well established. I'm not making any wild, crazy claims, this is really obvious grade school stuff and really intensely researched science. If you want to claim that it's possible for creatures that are biologically diverse (by at least 70 million years of evolution) to create viable hybrid offspring then that's an extreme claim and I'll need to see some convincing arguments before I'll accept that it's plausible.

avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  CMcMillan on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:58 am

Right what we presently accept is that.
But who knows maybe what Melba discovers is some can. I am not arguing that we don't need more research of course we do.
But you bang your virtual fist saying IT CAN'T be.
Just like all those biologist and evolutionists did with us mating with Neanderthal. Yet evidence has been shown we did.
So maybe this is the first step I don't know but i am not going to be closed minded like you seem to be with the IT CAN NOT BE because its never been proven yet.

I would rather keep an open mind about it possibly being true.

You and wood say science isn't infallible so who knows maybe science is wrong on this or Melba could be too.
I wait for more information.

avatar
CMcMillan

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2012-08-05
Location : USA CT

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  Woodwose on Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:10 pm

CMcMillan wrote:But you bang your virtual fist saying IT CAN'T be.

It's more a case of it being very, very, very, very, very, very implausible.

Just like all those biologist and evolutionists did with us mating with Neanderthal. Yet evidence has been shown we did.

The notion of Neanderthals interbreeding with us wasn't all that controversial. There were skeptics of course, but as soon as the data was made available, most doubters changed their minds though.

With Ketchum, she has presented the data (at least some of it) and with good reason many scientists are unconvinced. Inventing a whole new branch of evolution in order to justify muddled DNA only makes matters worse, as it makes it look like she is trying to make the data fit her hypothesis.

Maybe Ketchum is correct and she is about to overturn everything we know. Given the mountain of evidence in support of current models, it just doesn't seem likely.

You and wood say science isn't infallible.....

I don't think I've ever said that. In fact science moves forward because of the assumption that scientists make mistakes and that evidence can be misleading. The process of scientific discovery involves a constant reassessment of evidence and theories and scientists persistently attempt to prove themselves and others wrong.


Last edited by Woodwose on Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Woodwose

Posts : 389
Join date : 2012-08-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  CMcMillan on Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:19 pm

With Ketchum, she has presented the data (at least some of it) and with good reason many scientists are unconvinced. Inventing a whole new branch of evolution in order to justify muddled DNA only makes matters worse, as she is trying to make the data fit her hypothesis.

Don't see the MANY. I see a few GRAD students. and very few actual write ups. But we also have Scientists who support it.
So we will see when more people look into it.
avatar
CMcMillan

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2012-08-05
Location : USA CT

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  Squatchmaster G on Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:19 pm

CMcMillan wrote:So maybe this is the first step I don't know

Ketchum's study still hasn't passed review or replication and there's still every chance that the independent results will come back and show that her interpretation of the data was completely wrong, or that the data itself was junk and her interpretation was just wishful thinking. My claim that the mystery male progenitor couldn't have lemur-like nuDNA indicators and still produce a viable hybrid species with a modern human female is backed up by hard empirical evidence collected by tens of thousands of scientists over thousands of years and has been peer-reviewed and replicated by tens of thousands of other scientists. No one is claiming that it's 100% undeniably correct in absolutely every aspect but you would need some incredibly good evidence to prove that your hypothesis is plausible. Ketchum's paper is not (yet!) good evidence. If you have some other evidence other than a vague opinion to bring to the discussion I'll gladly hear it but until then I won't be able to find any merit in your argument.
avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  CMcMillan on Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:26 pm

So you can't wait?

Look i understand what your saying so stop trying to argue it then.
If you don't accept it because it hasn't been tested or what ever yet. then your discussions in this thread will lead no were.
So might as well stop posting in this thread.
I am in the camp Its possible but I will wait for more information.

You are its NOT possible because we have all this and we need to wait for more testing.

In the end we both look forward for more testing.
avatar
CMcMillan

Posts : 1097
Join date : 2012-08-05
Location : USA CT

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  Squatchmaster G on Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:29 pm

CMcMillan wrote:In the end we both look forward for more testing.

I can live with that.


This has been a really enjoyable discussion, I hope you had as much fun as I did. Smile
avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  Squatchmaster G on Mon Apr 15, 2013 8:58 am

It's been two months since Ketchum posted this Facebook status:


I'm still waiting ...
avatar
Squatchmaster G

Posts : 202
Join date : 2013-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  BurdenOfProof on Thu Apr 18, 2013 6:44 pm

the woman has no clue what science is even about
avatar
BurdenOfProof

Posts : 263
Join date : 2012-08-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Letter to Melba Ketchum

Post  hvhart on Wed Sep 18, 2013 1:20 am

Melba,



It's been well over two months since I submitted my first manuscript to you for consideration for publication in DeNovo.  This was done in good faith, with high hopes of acceptance.  The long time lapse without communication leads me to believe that you do not intend to publish it or the second publication which is near two months out.  So be it.  It would have been nice to hear this from you.  Your standards of professionalism in this area are way below those I am used to dealing with in serious academic scientific circles.  It is not acceptable to delay publication of results you disagree with while you scurry around to CYA.  



PLEASE WITHDRAW MY TWO MANUSCRIPTS FROM CONSIDERATION FOR PUBLICATION IN DENOVO.  If I have my way they will soon be in press in an open access real journal.



Best wishes in attempting to prove the existence of sasquatch.  Sorry, your first effort was unsuccessful.



Attached is the list of 29 species of fish, including the common names, which you claimed had significant homology to one of your nuDNA sequences (you didn't specify which)  and which you claimed were primates (your Supplementary Figure 5).  Did you even bother to translate the Latin names to common names?    



Haskell Hart, PhD



PS It's a bear, a human, and a dog: S26, S31 and S140, respectively.  Believe it and MOVE ON.

hvhart

Posts : 2
Join date : 2013-09-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Ketchum Paper - What the experts say.

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 7 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum