Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

MylesLI Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:08 pm

Withe the "leaks" coming out today it appears that we will have a slew of new information soon! I'm excited and expecting something important.
Myles

Tzieth Sat Nov 24, 2012 3:42 am

MylesLI wrote:Withe the "leaks" coming out today it appears that we will have a slew of new information soon! I'm excited and expecting something important.
Myles

I would have to say "YES"

Looking back, it all makes sense. Before Melba fired a lot of her staff, leaks were popping up like clockwork. Then shortly after she fires them, her office is up for sale which made everyone speculate that she was scamming. (Seemed to me that changing locations was the most obvious reason, but everyone assumed she was hi-tailing it lol) And then Nothing!!! Only that piece of crap Lindsay shooting his mouth off about her being squatch-raped and as usual not backing it up.

Then everything was tight-lipped until Melba was forced back into the open due to part of her findings being released in Russia. Melba also stated that it was not Dr. Igor's fault. This tells me that her findings were due to be released and confirmed that she had already passed peer-review otherwise, he would not have been permitted to say anything at all.

From what I got out of it, it passed so he thought it was okay to spill the beans, but she wanted to do it in her own way...

But what makes this seem legit to me, was David Paulides statement. It is an old argument that Melba would not hoax as she had too much to lose, but what about David Paulides? He has more to lose than she does. Two Red-Hot books out on the market now and I don't think he would risk his reputation (And Sales) unless he knew something we did not...

MylesLI Sat Nov 24, 2012 3:01 pm

This is astounding news....http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/943177

Tzieth Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:07 pm

MylesLI wrote:This is astounding news....http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/943177

Yeah they are still talking about how she won't pass peer review in the blogs. (The Nay-Sayers anyway.) But this article again seems to say she did pass and is waiting to be published...

Tzieth Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:23 pm

Wow, it just dawned on me.. You know what this means right? It confirms that there is definitely something else out there.

If this hybridization occured only 15,000 years ago, and it is not Neanderthal (Which I think still exists.) and it is not any known hominid, than what is it and where is it?

**Blondie1** Sat Nov 24, 2012 10:56 pm

Tzieth wrote:Wow, it just dawned on me.. You know what this means right? It confirms that there is definitely something else out there.

If this hybridization occured only 15,000 years ago, and it is not Neanderthal (Which I think still exists.) and it is not any known hominid, than what is it and where is it?

I'm beginning to think the human's are the aliens here on earth. Know what I mean? Think about it this really does tie into the "far out" theories of genetic hybrids and experimentation in the days before Noah.

Yes I know that is out there but some here will know what I mean.

Tzieth Sun Nov 25, 2012 3:59 am

Blondie1 wrote:
Tzieth wrote:Wow, it just dawned on me.. You know what this means right? It confirms that there is definitely something else out there.

If this hybridization occured only 15,000 years ago, and it is not Neanderthal (Which I think still exists.) and it is not any known hominid, than what is it and where is it?

I'm beginning to think the human's are the aliens here on earth. Know what I mean? Think about it this really does tie into the "far out" theories of genetic hybrids and experimentation in the days before Noah.

Yes I know that is out there but some here will know what I mean.

Out there? Look who you are talking to Blondie lol tongue

Tim, U.K. Sun Nov 25, 2012 9:27 am

Do you think these latest announcements from Ketchum mean we will soon ('soon' ha ha) get to see the Erickson footage?

Tzieth Sun Nov 25, 2012 9:48 am

Tim, U.K. wrote:Do you think these latest announcements from Ketchum mean we will soon ('soon' ha ha) get to see the Erickson footage?

Blame Lindsay for that one. Erickson was his target before Ketchum was. The leaks that came out of the Erickson project is pretty much what killed it. This is probably the main reason Ketchum kept so tight lipped.

I am not sure about "Sasquatch the Quest". But Ketchum was making a Documentary of her own called "Sasquatch, the Tribe."

I don't know how much of this habituation story is B.S. as a Lindsay smokescreen, or real. But if it was real, she probably has better pics than Erickson did.

BurdenOfProof Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:51 pm

Tzieth wrote:Wow, it just dawned on me.. You know what this means right? It confirms that there is definitely something else out there.

If this hybridization occured only 15,000 years ago, and it is not Neanderthal (Which I think still exists.) and it is not any known hominid, than what is it and where is it?

Where can I read the paper that confirms this?

As far as I am aware there has been no published paper?

**Blondie1** Sun Nov 25, 2012 10:16 pm

BurdenOfProof wrote:
Tzieth wrote:Wow, it just dawned on me.. You know what this means right? It confirms that there is definitely something else out there.

If this hybridization occured only 15,000 years ago, and it is not Neanderthal (Which I think still exists.) and it is not any known hominid, than what is it and where is it?

Where can I read the paper that confirms this?

As far as I am aware there has been no published paper?

Burden you know as well as I do that no paper has been published. We can surmise, debate, suppose and discuss what if's as long as we want to.

Tzieth Mon Nov 26, 2012 7:11 am

Here is the thing. read this carefully, Burden.

Full details of the study will be presented in the near future when the study manuscript publishes.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/943177#ixzz2DK6dphsS"

Those are not Ketchum's words, those are the words of the journalist. This tells me it passed peer review and the more I think on this, the more it makes sense. In the past Ketchum said nothing. When she did say it, she would use words such as trying to pass peer review, or she was confidant it would pass peer review, or Hopefully she will be published soon. Furthermore she her self has said in her own words (Not Lindsays) That she "WAS NOT ALLOWED" to talk about it, that everyone will know after the peer review. This is when all your fellow Skeptics, Trolls and Nay-Sayers went bolistic and suddenly all became accomplished peer review scientists and stated this was B.S. and yada yada yada... That is now neither here nor there. The point is that Ketchum refused to talk about it, stated that she could not talk about it even if she wanted to, had all these NDA's etc.. ect... And now all of the sudden she spills the brunt of everything. Meaning she obviously is now allowed to talk about it and this MUST mean that she did pass and the publishing is now in the works.

Ketchum herself, was not going to say a word until Dr. Igor Bertsev did so first. If there is any truth to Lindsays claims that Ketchum was threatening law suits left and right over NDA's, then Burtchev was rather brave to do this, or he knew something the rest of us did not. (Actually he obviously did.) Ketchum then not only gave the press release, but at the same time defended Burtchev stating that she knew why he did it and that it was not his fault.

There are rules to report writing that are cardinal to journalist and to Law Enforcement. You never give exacts unless you are sure and in some cases you don't do it Period. If I was on a call to a domestic dispute and I personally witnessed a man hit a woman with a glass bottle, and I looked at my watch and saw that it was 5:15pm and in my report I wrote "So-n-So hit So-N-So in the head with a glass bottle at 5:15pm" That would be laughed at right out of court. It would be looked at as unprofessional and inaccurate. However if I wrote "While at Such-n-such location and at approximately 1715hours, I did observer so-n-so strike so-n-so in the cranial region with an object." My timing of the incident has a window... I used the word "Approximately". I stressed the fact that I DID see this and I was not going off of hear-say. I used the word "Blunt Object" because it was not sharp and if I were to use "Glass bottle" in my incident report, then the defense would have time to take that apart and ask "Where is it?" Where if asked in court I could say "It appeared to be a glass bottle."

These rules are not to just make sure that any prosecution runs smoothly, they were to protect us as well from counter law suits.(CYA) The same is true for journalists. They are supposed to keep their reports unbiased. (That one they break all the time.) But to use absolutes such as "Will" and "When" is a major No-Go unless they are sure.

The end of that press release pretty much stated that the Publication is underway.

BurdenOfProof Mon Nov 26, 2012 4:58 pm

This all does seem a bit fishy to me and I feel my skeptical position on this is justified.

CMcMillan Mon Nov 26, 2012 8:42 pm

Blondie1 wrote:
Tzieth wrote:Wow, it just dawned on me.. You know what this means right? It confirms that there is definitely something else out there.

If this hybridization occured only 15,000 years ago, and it is not Neanderthal (Which I think still exists.) and it is not any known hominid, than what is it and where is it?

I'm beginning to think the human's are the aliens here on earth. Know what I mean? Think about it this really does tie into the "far out" theories of genetic hybrids and experimentation in the days before Noah.

Yes I know that is out there but some here will know what I mean.

I think it is more that our DNA is ALIEN.
If you have ever seen Mission to Mars I think this may be closer to what happen on earth.
Unless Planet X will be passing soon.
I have wondered what if Planet X travels on another dimension and can only be seen in a shadow like affect on the earth when it comes close.

No idea.

Tzieth Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:38 pm

CMcMillan wrote:
Blondie1 wrote:
Tzieth wrote:Wow, it just dawned on me.. You know what this means right? It confirms that there is definitely something else out there.

If this hybridization occured only 15,000 years ago, and it is not Neanderthal (Which I think still exists.) and it is not any known hominid, than what is it and where is it?

I'm beginning to think the human's are the aliens here on earth. Know what I mean? Think about it this really does tie into the "far out" theories of genetic hybrids and experimentation in the days before Noah.

Yes I know that is out there but some here will know what I mean.

I think it is more that our DNA is ALIEN.
If you have ever seen Mission to Mars I think this may be closer to what happen on earth.
Unless Planet X will be passing soon.
I have wondered what if Planet X travels on another dimension and can only be seen in a shadow like affect on the earth when it comes close.

No idea.

Oh, funny you should mention that lol. The other day on our local news, they were announcing the discovery of a "Dark Star" at the end of our Solar-system lol

CMcMillan Tue Nov 27, 2012 10:30 am

What about the Rogue Planet found as well?

Tzieth Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:07 pm

CMcMillan wrote:What about the Rogue Planet found as well?

I haven't heard about the rouge Planet.. But to confirm that we do have a binary solar system, sort of backs up what Sitchin was saying years ago lol.

CMcMillan Wed Nov 28, 2012 7:52 pm

Tzieth wrote:
CMcMillan wrote:What about the Rogue Planet found as well?

I haven't heard about the rouge Planet.. But to confirm that we do have a binary solar system, sort of backs up what Sitchin was saying years ago lol.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2012/11/15/orphan-alien-planet-found-nearby/

Tzieth Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:19 am

CMcMillan wrote:
Tzieth wrote:
CMcMillan wrote:What about the Rogue Planet found as well?

I haven't heard about the rouge Planet.. But to confirm that we do have a binary solar system, sort of backs up what Sitchin was saying years ago lol.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2012/11/15/orphan-alien-planet-found-nearby/

100 lightyears away sort of knocks it out of the "Planet X" range. But I do find this odd that this is released after the news of the brown dwarf lol

Sponsored content

Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Only 15,000 years????

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?

Re: Will there really be a breakthrough "very, very, very soon"?