Sunday, November 25, 2012

Doubtful News Reacts to Melba Ketchum's Bigfoot DNA


"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." --Sharon Hill of Doubtful News reacting to Melba Ketchum's Press Release

Sharon Hill is the editor of DoubtfulNews.com, it would not hurt our feelings one bit, if you jumped directly to her post titled, "Melba Ketchum announces Bigfoot DNA results. Without the data".

For the rest of you, let us tell you why Doubtful News is an important blog for bigfooters to follow. Unlike some of the other skeptics, Sharon Hill is extremely consistent in her critical thinking and arguments. Also unlike other skeptics, she does not pick low-hanging fruit to mock Bigfooters. The best reason to read Doubtful News is to get a fresh perspective, we have been challenged by Sharon Hill and feel we have been the better for it.

You can get a taste of her style from the excerpt below lifted from yesterday's (11.25.2012)  post, "Melba Ketchum announces Bigfoot DNA results. Without the data"
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.

20 comments:

  1. tired of this site

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for this, Guy. I appreciate a fair exchange among those of different worldviews. There are wide varieties of opinions on this and I am willing to give Melba the benefit of the doubt but this has been a circus. In order to be taken seriously on a very difficult subject to be serious about, you have to step your game. Instead we have a series of highly unprofessional and really dubious informants and activities.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Truly terrifying when you realise they've mixed a 'shoot to kill' policy with bunk.....Sharon's totally right...It's amazing how infantile and dangerous such a 'serious' group is.....What's gonna happen the first time someone uses the "I thought is was Bigfoot" Defence in a Murder Trial? (seriously, what would happen IF someone really believed that they were shooting at 'Bigfoot' and used it as a deadpan real defence?)....thanks for directing us here from 'Idoubtit', it's been enlightening, I've seen the Crazies and I want to go home now (and I'm even more glad that us Australians aren't charging about the Bush, shooting at Imaginary Things....we have plenty of Imaginary Bush Creatures, though as far a I know, no organised Societies actually actively wanting to 'hunt' them down to 'prove they exist'....it doesn't really matter to us, like it does to our neurotic cousins across the Pacific).... Vin, Australia

      Delete
  3. I think the site is fair, and honestly, I'd love for the Bigfoot DNA to come back 100% positive. For one thing, I've personally written about our local Bigfoot hunting group that agreed at their last meeting to shoot. The feel bringing in a dead Bigfoot is the only way to protect other Bigfoot (by proving them real, they can finally have real legislation passed to protect them). The DNA evidence, if real, will do this without a Bigfoot being shot, or as was my fear in my article, someone just out hoaxing or messing around, being shot. The sad fact is the TV shows and soon a show offering what has been described as a "bounty" (though it's simply teams competing for a prize for proof) has encouraged many more Bigfoot groups to start hunting. The positive, if Bigfoot is out there, we may have proof soon. The downside, a lot of these groups 100% support shooting a Bigfoot. Morally right or wrong, they feel getting that proof out there is more important than the life of one creature. So PLEASE if there is DNA evidence, let's have it IN FULL. Let's have another lab replicate the results, let's get this written up.... delay, "it's coming soon", fudging...science is slow and careful but this is beyond slow and careful. Meanwhile my neighbor is out hunting Bigfoot with his group, and loaded guns.

    ReplyDelete

  4. Sorry but Doubtful News does not tell me anything new I am capable of independent rational thought, why is there so many people in internet land assuming I need to be led by the hand to understand anything Bigfoot related, video breakdowns, picture analysis, and now how to apply scientific principles all of these self appointed educators are essentially beating their own drum and making assumptions about the average intellect of anyone who takes a passing interest in the crypto field.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Because 'Bigfoot' is the equivalent of a 'gateway drug', that'll inevitably lead to more serious Bunk and Woo....and that's where you WILL be exploited one way or another... Vin, Australia

    ReplyDelete
  6. Now I can better imagine what J. Harlan Bretz went through during the 1930s and 1940s trying to prove that a huge flood carved the scablands of Eastern Washington State. It wasn't until a disinterested other scientist commented that there were many, many ancient shorelines above Missoula, MT, that mainstream science finally agree to the floods--over 50, in fact, back between 15,000 and 12,000 years ago. Sasquatch science is in the same early stage now. The only people who can truly say they know sasquatches exist are those who see one in daylight and have credible witnesses to corroborate it. All other comments are just opinion--but opinion is good--it keeps the discussion going. To get a better idea of whether sasquatches are real, go to the BFRO website and read some of the investigations by Scott Taylor, who has seen several in WA state with other people with him at the time. You can see him and some colleagues on YouTube by clicking on "WA BFRO in the field". You commenters are all important in this search. Keep it going, whether you've seen one or not. Best wishes to you all.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I would like to comment on Ms. Hill. She puts across a pretty good cover. Her cover is that is a true "skeptic." That is, she is open to the possibility that Bigfoot may in fact exist, but she is dubious of that notion. I have been reading her stuff for a long time now. It's quite clear that Hill's true position is that it is obvious and clear that there is NO SUCH THING AS BIGFOOT and BIGFOOT SIMPLY DOES NOT EXIST. She has stated this unequivically on numeorous occasions. The same view is shared by her commenters. She also comments frequently on JREF where identical views are held by her co-believers. Her views on JREF as insistent non-belief. Hill also believes that since it obvious that there is no such thing as Bigfoot, it's idiotic to search for one or try to prove their existence and anyone who does so is a fool or an idiot at best.

    IOW, Hill is a scofftic.

    However, Hill has always been trying to have it both ways. This is so that if Bigfoot is ever proven to be real, she can claim that she was open-minded all along, and she never was a scofftic. That is, she can preserve her reputation without having egg on her face and having to eat crow, which are appropriate punishments for a woman like Hill.

    So not only is Hill a scofftic, but she is a dishonest one who is playing a double game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am certain that Sharon Hill is quite doubtful, but I am just as interested in her process as I am of her opinion.

      In my opinion, Sharon takes the title skeptic more seriously than others. calling yourself a skeptic requires a lot of discipline and rigor to back it up. Many self-described skeptics are just folks who are good at playing devil's advocate or even worse, just plain contrarians.

      I will have to disagree with you on Sharon Hill's character. I think she has been quite clear regarding her doubts about Bigfoot. I still thank you for your comment Robert, I have a great deal of admiration for the both of you.

      Delete
  8. Thanks Guy.

    Mr. Lindsay, your behavior is despicable and this is no secret to anyone. Don't project your sick delusions onto me.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Robert, Sharon says (like me and many other skeptics) that based on the evidence we have there is no discernable reason to believe Bigfoot exist.

    I don't believe we'll ever find a living Bigfoot. I've always viewed Bigfoot in the same vein as Godzilla and Frankenstein. Pop culture monsters.

    As ms. Hill has stated NUMEROUS times, show us a body. Then we have proof and we will acknowledge the existence of Bigfoot.

    However, we can't just blindly believe/accept the existence of Bigfoot without any real evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  10. themanwithoutanameNov 27, 2012, 6:41:00 PM

    Nobody is asking you to blindly believe that they exist. They are asking you to pry yourself away from your keyboard, and go camping out into a remote forest at night, by yourself. And please make it a place that nobody has camped at before because that really annoys them. And bring along a couple of drum sticks, so that you can give them a wack every so often. Having a fresh hot cooked chicken sitting out on a log is usually good for a tree getting pushed over. If you make it till morning without hightailing it out of there, AND can explain every single noise that occurs, then you weren't paying attention and went to bed too soon. You can only believe in Bigfoot if you take the time to prove it to yourself, instead of simply denying everything presented to you on the internet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And what if you don't have time or live FAR away from a remote forest?

      Another question, is Bigfoot indigenous to the North America? If I go out camping in a remote forest here in Norway, will I be able to see Bigfoot here? (where the Bigfoot community is non-existant)

      Delete
    2. themanwithoutanameNov 28, 2012, 10:05:00 PM

      Snoma, I believe that Bigfoot is a worldwide phenomenon, except perhaps Antarctica and the Arctic. They do live in Hawaii, for instance. To begin with, your expectations are way to high. The 4th dimensional Bigfoot survive by making themselves more stealthy than you can imagine in even your wildest dreams. Your only hope of convincing yourself that there is something of significant size and number in the woods around you, is to LISTEN. Listen for branch breaks, rock clacking, sighing, growling, rocks being thrown into the ground, rocks being thrown nearby, foot scuffing, a foot pushoff in loose gravel, nearby clicking, footsteps coming from a nearby location where you can plainly see that there is nothing to see, a stick being dragged down a tree trunk and hitting multiple branches in rapid succession. These noises can come from nearby points far up in the trees. In other words, you are listening for forest spirit noises that require thumbs to hold something, or highly coordinated bipedal feet to imply both a primate and intelligence. At most you may see bright flashes of light, coming from what appears to be thin air. Once you have established those two traits, then you simply eliminate everything that it could not be by the process of elimination. You should then arrive at a very short list. There is no reason why the Bigfoot cannot exist within say 5 miles of the ocean, where there is not much snow. They will move out of snow covered areas for the winter, and move back in during the summer. And return to the same place, season after season. So you can establish a rapore with the same group by returning to the same place year after year. Once they see that you are not pulling out either guns, cameras or powerfull flashlights, and you may even be doing some nice things for them like leaving organic apples or playing romantic music, then they may loosen up a bit. Attempt to talk real slow to them. You can also whisper and they will be just as likely to understand that. But you can never trick them because they will always know your next move before you do it since they can read your tiniest thought before you even recognize it to be thought. It is important to go by yourself but stay near to your vehicle, as well as pitch your tent right next to your vehicle. The action does not really begin to happen until it starts to get dark. Look for them to test your resolve to stay there. This may happen soon after your arrive. That test may last up to about 5 minutes. Then it's gravy after that. And one more thing. 4th dimensional means that they are invisible most of the time when man is around. The more remote the location and plentiful the food sources, the more time they will likely spend in man's dimension, and thus become visible again.

      Delete
    3. themanwithoutanameNov 28, 2012, 10:11:00 PM

      A good listener can find Bigfoot in most large wooded city parks. But you have to have no background noise from cars, steams, wind, crickets, bees, etc. Otherwise, the noises that they make are so suttle that an untrained listener will blow them off if they hear them at all.

      Delete
    4. 4th dimension? What does that mean? Is that really a thing? I always assumed the 4th dimension was just some fictional sci-fi term for time travel or parallell universes and such. What does it have to do with Bigfoot?

      No offense but I found most of your rhetoric and logic to nothing but gibberish. But then again, I'm no theoretical quantum physicist or anything.
      Maybe that's why it all sounds Greek to me?

      Delete
    5. themanwithoutanameNov 29, 2012, 12:50:00 PM

      That is why Bigfoot is far too complicated for the masses to understand. You have to experience it in order to understand it. Reading about it on the internet, is not enough. Physicists do not even use the term "4th dimension" anymore. Because "TIME" is no longer the 4th dimension. Your visible world is comprised of the first 3 dimensions. The 4th dimension has to do with the infinite number of frequencies that the basic quantum energy loops can vibrate at. The smallest ingredient for all matter, is quantum energy loops. During some narrow range of those vibrational frequencies, the associated matter is visible to your naked eye. During the rest, it is invisible to your naked eye. Your eye is like a radio receiver. The radio receives frequencies very close to the one selected on the tuning dial, so that you can only hear what is being broadcast on that channel. Your eye is set on one station, and cannot see the other stations. Multiple radio signals exist simultaneously. Similarly, multiple dimensions exist simultaneously, that can pass through one another.

      Delete
  11. Replies
    1. *backs away slowly...*

      Delete
    2. themanwithoutanameDec 4, 2012, 9:19:00 AM

      I Doubt It writes "Time to back away"??

      Since you are technically a scientist, does that mean you will be leaving to get out of that slinky dress and put on some warm clothes, so that you can approach this subject in an open minded scientific manner? Or have you already shut the door on doing a few simple field investigations, in order to see if a woman who sits behind their computer screen just about 24/7, can somehow explain every branch snap and twig break that will occur on your next night time visit to the woods? The choice is yours as to whether you actually practice SCIENCE, instead of just having that education on your resume.

      Delete

Let's keep the language and material clean, keep in mind we have younger fans that get their Bigfoot News here too.

Please read our terms of use policy.