Bigfoot News January 8, 2012

Mass confusion over Ketchum Project’s status at Nature Magazine. We reported earlier that Dr. Melba Ketchum’s Bigfoot paper was at Nature Magazine at some point. Our source for that was ultimately David Paulides, who is about as close to Ketchum as you can get. The rumor was later confirmed by Matt Moneymaker, who said that he had spoken to a peer reviewer at Nature, who said the paper had been handed back for a couple of reasons, including not having a testable hypothesis and no zoologist on board.

However, we recently checked in with our sources, and it turns out that the whole Nature rumor may have been in error. The source said that two people had written to Henry Gee, editor of Nature. He replied to both of them, stating that no paper by Ketchum was under consideration at that time. Apparently this means that Ketchum’s paper was never at Nature in the first place. The source said they did not know why Paulides was wrong about this.

So…Henry Gee is lying? This doesn’t seem right.

Matt Moneymaker is lying? It seems a bit odd for him to make up a story out of whole cloth like this, but he’s an nasty piece of work with an extremely low reputation in the field on the moral and personal level. Bottom line is he’s widely hated for ample reason. But would he make up a lie like this? Doesn’t seem like Matt.

At the end of the day, we are left with a mystery about whether or not the paper was ever at Nature Magazine. On the face of it, it appears that the paper was never there, but that means that Moneymaker made up a huge lie, which seems a bit out of character even for him.

Paulides somewhat out of the loop with the Ketchum Study. Recently, David Paulides has tried very hard to intimate that he and his group and the Ketchum DNA study are one and the same thing. This goes along with his grandiose personality, but what’s the truth behind it?

Granted, he is close to Ketchum. But how close? It appears that if he got the Nature rumor wrong, there is no way that he is a hard and fast part of the Ketchum study. The Ketchum study is run by…Ketchum. Paulides is just another hanger-on, and positioning himself as running the thing gives Paulides narcissistic supply.

But Ketchum seems quite clear that he’s not an integral part of the project because apparently she has not shared with him the truth about the Nature study, nor did she correct him when he was wrong. She’s apparently not discussing many of the intimate details of the study with Paulides. Which is all to her credit, of course, since it shows she is running a very tight ship and locking down her secrets well.

Ketchum reveals she has seen Bigfoots on multiple occasions. In a stunning post on her Facebook page, Ketchum admitted that she has seen Bigfoots on multiple occasions recently. The news was carried on major sites like Cryptomundo.

Yes, I do know about them now. I am glad I didn’t see them until after most of the data was in. I needed to prove it scientifically to myself first as a former skeptic before hitting the field so to speak and actually observing them. I had no fear, the ones I encountered were peaceful and gentle. I keep going back, I know why so many people love doing this now.

This is a most interesting post! It has sparked a lot of controversy on the Net, to say the least.

We have our own theory about what is going on here. Here is what happened:

Sometime in the past year, at least by mid-October, Ketchum got the opportunity to visit a Bigfoot habitation site in Oklahoma. We believe it was in the Honobia region of Oklahoma, on private property, at or near the residence of a woman named Arla Collett-Williams. While there, she was able to see a family of Bigfoots. She has since gone back a number of times, and has apparently seen Bigfoots on each occasion. Why she has not snapped pictures or video of them, I have no idea.

Arla Collett-Williams, who is a grandmother, in her native habitat.

Arla Collett-Williams is part Native American of Tsalgi and Chata blood, and people say that she takes people to a place where they can see Bigfoots. Whether this place is on her property or not is not known.

However, Collett-Williams has come by the site to say that Ketchum has never been to her property and she never takes anyone to see Bigfoots.

However, we believe that Collett-Williams, like so many Bigfooters, is lying. In the MNBRT radio show about the Honobia Conference that aired around mid-October, host Abe Del Rio states that Ketchum told him that she had seen a group of Bigfoots when she was in the company of Collett-Williams.

Arla Collett-Williams at the Honobia Bigfoot Conference on October 1.

What is behind the December 31 release date rumor for the Ketchum paper? Sources tell us that there never was a supposed 12-31 release date for Ketchum’s paper. Instead, the December 31 date referred to when Ketchum was hoping to have made it through the peer review which she is up to her neck in. From the looks of her positively giddy post after the New Year saying, “It won’t be long now,” she may well have passed the peer review.

If she really did make it all the way through review by New Year’s Eve, then the paper may be getting published in ~3 months, but that’s strictly conjecture.

Ketchum paper was rewritten. As part of the peer review process, Ketchum’s paper has gone through a complete rewrite at least once so far.

Ketchum’s paper expected to take a long time. Ketchum has previously been through peer review a couple of times, but both of those were a breeze. However, this is a whole new kettle of fish. There was some speculation that publication could be delayed as long as two years after Ketchum’s initial rewrite, which could mean that we have to wait at least another year for publication.

Background on Ketchum. Ketchum obtained an extremely competitive Moody Scholarship which is apparently given out by the Moody Bible Study group. There are ~1,000 scholarships granted nationwide every year. She then enrolled in a rigorous fast track combined BA + DVM program that lasts only 5 years. She had set up her own veterinary business when she was only 23 years old. That’s quite impressive.

Sources tell me that Ketchum is very, very smart. One criticism is she is not a geneticist. However, she has been studying genetics deeply on her own for a long time now, and has become quite the autodidact in this area.

Justin Smeja visited by California Department of Fish and Game recently. In his radio interview, Smeja made a shocking assertion. He said that he had been visited by two uniformed officers of the CA DFG around November 15, 2011. They knocked on his door, and he was not happy to see them. They asked to come in, but he said he’d rather talk to them outside. He went outside and locked the door behind him.

They said, incredibly, “We are here to investigate the killing of 2 Sasquatches in Northern California in October of last year.” Some conversation ensued, and they said they wanted to search his house.

Smeja said, “Well, you can’t do that.”

The officers replied, “Ok, fine. We will go and get a search warrant then. It only takes half an hour to get one.”

But they never came back. Smeja had a small piece of Bigfoot in his house, and he quickly moved it somewhere else. Later he called the office and said he wanted to make a deal with them. He would come down to the office with an attorney and give them one small piece of Bigfoot in return for no prosecution on any charges. The office replied that they were putting the matter on the back burner for the moment and would be back in touch with him.

We were not able to confirm any of this story with DFG sources, but they did not deny it either. My DFG source said they had heard of the story, and they were looking into it to see whether or not it even happened. The source expressed some doubt that the story was true. The officer did admit that he had done some minor investigation into the Sierra Kills on his part. However, he felt that the Kills story was ridiculous, and he thought  Bigfoots did not even exist.

If it is true that uniformed officers showed up to investigate the killing of a Bigfoot, this would be a major event. Of course, we have had many reports in the past of authorities investigating Bigfoot killings, but seldom has the witness given us his name. And this is the first case to my knowledge where a US government law enforcement agency has admitted to investigating the shooting of a Bigfoot.

We were ridiculed for running this story, but it looks like it is true.

MNBRT radio’s interview with Justin Smeja. The investigation, research and questioning of Smeja was handled superbly by top notch researchers JC Johnson and Abe Del Rio. It would have been nice if they credited us for breaking the story. After all, if it wasn’t for us, that interview never would have happened.

Sierra Kills adult Bigfoot was a male. We have now heard from two separate sources that the adult Bigfoot killed in the Sierra Kills was a male. The two sources are high ranking members of the BFRO. Note that although the BFRO officially says that the Sierra Kills story is nonsense as per Dictator Moneymaker’s directive, some individual members believe in the story.

Derek Randles lying about Sierra Kills. Randles stated that he did not go to the site of the Sierra Kills for 10 months because he didn’t have the money and because he was all tied down with work and hobbies. But this is not the truth at all. Sources tell us that as soon as the Olympic Project was told the story about the Kills, Randles said they had a team ready to go down there the very next day.

The Olympic Project are the pros of the pros, and they are boots on the ground guys. They’ve never been known to hoax, and they are top notch researchers of the highest quality in the field. So, while shocking, the admission that they could head down there the very next day does make sense.

Why do we talk crap about people on here? We do it because we don’t like them! Why do we not like so many people? Because we think they’re nasty, and they deserve to be slammed or disliked. Next question?

Another part of it is we are dedicated to the whole story about everyone, the good, the bad, the ugly and the indifferent.

Why we don’t list sources. Well, sometimes we do, but not usually. Our sources are at significant risk for talking to us. Some have been threatened with violence for doing so. Others are violating their NDA’s. Some can be run out of their Bigfoot groups for talking to us. People can be fired from their jobs and pretty much have their careers ruined if they’re traced back to us. That’s how ruthless the people who run Bigfoot groups are. So that’s why we don’t list sources. We put them at too much risk if we do that.

Where are our sources? It’s clear that all of the big players in the Bigfoot world hate us, that is, the leaders of the big organizations and those running the major studies and whatnot. That’s ok with us. Just look at the motto of this blog. The major groups have been scrambling like crazy to plug leaks and are paranoid and obsessed with secrecy. Nevertheless, we still have good sources in many camps. Here is rundown of where we have sources and how many we have:

Erickson Project: Leaking like a boat full of holes. We have several sources with them, but have stopped printing things from them because matters have become so crazy over there with Adrian Erickson cracking down. 3-4+ sources.

Ketchum Project: Harder to get good info from, but we have several sources there too.  3-4+ sources.

BFRO: Very tightly locked down. We have several sources there also, but they are not as well developed. 2+ sources.

Olympic Project: Very hard to get information out of them, and much of what I get is only conjecture. A very secretive and almost conspiratorial group, to their credit. 2+ sources.

NABS: Very hard to get information out of this notoriously paranoid and secretive group. 1+ sources.

35 Comments

Filed under Americas, Animals, Apes, Bigfoot, California, Government, Local, Mammals, North America, Regional, Science, USA, West, Wild

35 responses to “Bigfoot News January 8, 2012

  1. If the Native American called Arla you are talking about is Arla Collett-Williams, she has a Facebook profile at: http://www.facebook.com/arla3?ref=ts

    She also posts on http://www.bigfootforums.com and says that she regularly makes trips with people who want to see bigfeet but that she cannot always guarantee that the bigfeet will show up.

  2. grammy97

    I’m glad to see this update: thought you might have lost enthusiasm for the subject. I’d like to offer two hypotheses, one about Dr. Ketchum, and one on the Smeja officers.

    * No videos or photos of the Bigfoot group she saw? Maybe not necessary. She knows what the DNA proves. If they are humans, she has the science to verify that. People take photos and videos to prove that Bigfoot is real: she has nothing to prove.

    * The “two uniformed officers of the CA DFG’ who showed up at Justin Smeja’s door could have been impersonators. Such things and worse have been done by people trying to claw their way to the top of the publicity heap.

    Hoping that 2012 will resolve most of these questions; grammy

  3. vergearuker

    WHat dNa? I pee pee on you humans. Tel thah justin fucker him better stay out of woods or we eat him! ORLAK, Garlic Eater Tribe sasquatch, Jarbidge,Nevada

  4. Gertrude

    “While journals are published monthly, peer reviewed papers are published only quarterly.”

    This is flatly false. Journals are either peer reviewed or they aren’t. If a journal is peer reviewed, all its articles are peer reviewed. Some publish monthly, a few are published more often, some are published less often.

  5. Arla

    Your facts are untrue Mr Lindsay.Dr Ketchum has never been to my home.I also don’t make regular trips to take people to see the Bigfoot either.

  6. John

    All you facts about Dr. Ketchum are wrong, better do your homework and research before you believe your soruces. I have a great belief you will be eating your accusations very soon. Do you ever stop to think that your information from others is wrong and your going to turn out with eggfooyoung on your face. Check before you speak, verify before you release. Your a complete idiot.

  7. apehuman

    Robert, the “printing crap” and “why” is so fndamanetal to freedom and truth/empowerment that I am surprised by the question. Some of your information be wrong. and some right. Do I expect 100%? No, you tell me not to, that your sources also suffer from partial info. Am I getting more than any other source on this subject? Yes. Will I be patient for another year or two? It Depends.
    Will I care to know/learn the turth after the players present their version. Yep!

    Thanks!

  8. Mr. E2ME

    I appreciate your Bigfoot updates Mr. Lindsay. I feel you are correct about dysfunctional bigfooters. Very few seem stable and grounded.
    Great work, I look forward to more. Also enjoying some of your other articles..

  9. buckhunter1969

    People…… please. Mr. Lindsay always states that his information comes from “sources” and he cannot state if they are true or not. He pasases along information and clearly notes that they may or may not be true. This site is not the “world news” where perfection is expected. This site informs me and entertains as well. Robert, keep up the good work. If your information upsets the “wackos” , let it!

  10. Maurice Cloud

    Well said Robert. I, for one, never believed Ketchum’s paper would amount to much as I suspect her writing skills are a biscuit too minimal for a journal the likes of Nature. And from what we hear she is simply too much the prima donna to ask for the requisite assistance to get over that obstacle(and that might require sharing a bit of the glory now mightn’t it . . ?) As for Smellya, erm, Smeja, hasn’t he had his fifteen minutes . . ? His tale — and I mean that in the finest Disney-esque sense of the word — has lost its shelf-life. Done. Too many rotters claiming “they” have the proof, the alpha, the beta, and then . . . nothing. And we wonder why the larger population doesn’t take this seriously . . . Cheers!

  11. Maurice Cloud

    PS. Since we’re on the topic . . . everyone should have a listen to a new song by the entrancing Kate Bush called “Wild Man”, it’s about our friend’s Asian cousin, the Yeti. Be sure to hear the full seven and a half minutes version . . . lovely and mesmerising

  12. Pingback: Cryptomundo » Update: Dr. Melba Ketchum a Bigfoot Witness?

  13. Pingback: Cryptomundo Links to Us | Robert Lindsay

  14. uncle tancred

    Robert: My take on your observation about Bigfooters: I think we’re all sort of the same. I was fascinated as a kid by the possibility that this creature exists. I know this grew out of my love of paleohistory and human evolution, also, I admit, from my love of monsters. This interest was sparked by a magazine story I saw about the big footprints being found in northern California at the time (ca 1960). But it was a secret belief. Something an odd bird kid like me didnt admit to his friends that he believed in. Then, as a young adult I began to discount the possibility that hairy giants could live among us , especially EVERYWHERE across the U.S. The plethora of reports discredited the phenomenon to me. Pacific Northwest, yes, thats possible. Festus Missouri and southern Illinois? Not possible. But then gradually I began to come around again. Began to read the new research by guys like Grover Krantz, Carleton Coons, John Green and others. The more I read, the more sense it made and the more certain I became. After a point I, and others I assume, took possession of the creature. I felt vindicated, personally vindicated and somehow validated. It was mine to reveal to the incredulous. I think lots of personalities out there have taken somewhat the same journey. Unfortunately we are at a moment in the history of this research when all these egos and personal claims of possession of the big guy, are at loggerheads.

    • I think the last sentence is the most important one here.

    • Look at the comments sections on BF blogs and sites and see how nutty and unstable so many of these people are. I’ve dealt with all sorts of fanatics in my blogging – Zionists, neocons, Indian nationalists, gay rights types, Marxists, PC types, Blacks…and I’ve dealt with a lot of really nasty people in all of those groups. But the Bigfooters are worse than all of them.

      There are way too many bad ones and not enough of the ones like you, Uncle.

    • I think that is a very honest post..cool.

  15. buckhunter1969

    I have looked at MANY of the websites that deal with Bigfoot sightings and databases since my unexplained vocalizations event that happened two years ago. In my opinion, MOST of the people involved are searching for fame and not for the truth. I am not 100% sure that BF exists, but I want the truth to come out one way or another! If all of the “research” groups would quit the secrecy and deceit and work TOGETHER, the truth would come out. It would please me very much if Melba Ketchum’s DNA results proved that a new species or sub-species of hominid existed, but I am not holding my breath. The secrecy, back stabbing, and self etifications must cease for a unified group to present the truth to a largely skeptical public. Just my opinion!

  16. uncle tancred

    Thanks, Robert

  17. Steve Byrne

    I am really looking forward to some truth (via DNA) on this thing. Hopefully it will lead to truth about other things and humanity will start shaking off the funk. Unfortunately, bigfooters can not possibly work together in more than the smallest of groups. It’s like gold prospecting with no claims and gold that might run away. Transparency is death, both from other BF-ers and from hoaxers, hence the dysfunction. I don’t think anything will ever change this aspect of the issue.

    If there are certain scholastic rules on getting into “peer reviewed” journals that require added years of secrecy, then I suppose someone should be knocking on that door, at least once out of politeness. The effect of hominoid disclosure will be very profound on the scientific community. It means that the most logical process of acquiring knowledge about our world led most “science professionals” to a very erroneous conclusion. I hope the backlash does not send us back too far. I am an engineer, and as such we have the luxury of testing prototypes to prove our theories. Biologists and zoologists don’t always have that luxury, but they are still expected to have an opinion. The mainstream, middle of the road position is the safest. If you are wrong, then you’re in good company and if you are right, then obviously no problem. The Bigfoot phenomenon is allowing plenty of time for the “pros” to adjust their positions to suit the current evidence. It just hasn’t quite become fashionable to do so yet. There are other issues at stake such as climate change, energy and food production, population growth etc. “Mainstream science” really can’t afford much of a hit in approval numbers at this time.

    Keep in mind that scientists want to please people just like everyone else. In many cases they come from challenging backgrounds or have experienced other influences that steered them toward examination and introspection rather than sales and marketing. My point is that the opinions we tend to express the most, are typically the ones we believe will be the most popular, even as scientists.

    Truth is another matter. There is great consternation over the value of truth. The truth is often not our friend. Some people know this and hide it from us for our own good. We do this with our children and they do it back to us. We are probably happier without all the truth, but then we have our vanity about knowledge. Our vanity is what drives us and what separates us from the “non-naked” beings. We place status value on how much we can demonstrate that we know, much more than we do our happiness. It should be the other way around. Vanity keeps us from playing, because it may appear immature. It keeps us from asking girls out, because that will establish status, possibly downward. It makes some of us buy Ferrari’s and not drive them for fun. It makes scientists timid about their curiosities and it makes high school an emotional nightmare for anyone different, curious or physically unattractive.

    Bigfooters are brave people. They still have the vanity, but they are more conditioned to the ridicule and willing to endure it (at least those who come out and talk). I wonder how much we never hear about.

    I also just want to throw out a big “Fuck you, you worthless shit!”, to whoever may or may not have killed (male and/or female plus young)sasquatches in the sierra’s without properly retrieving the bodies and presenting them for proper examination. At least this disaster isn’t as public as the Georgia thing. Maybe you’re waiting for Melba’s paper to come out before you show us the body? Maybe it got confiscated and you have conduct guidelines? Maybe it never happened? Maybe it’s like it was told and Smeja is a trigger happy chickenshit. Whatever…. massive fail. I’m pissed.

    Jabbered/monologued… sorry, I guess I needed to vent.

    Thanks again RL. When I have some good poop, I’ll fling it to you first!

  18. Hi, Richard Stubstad here, still hanging in there regardless of the outcomes vis-a-vis sasquatch.

    Recently, I entered a blog called the “Bigfoot Lunch Club”, where I saw the following post & made the response below:

    Newsytype said…
    The yeti finger, famously smuggled out of Asia by actor Jimmy Stewart, was recently tested for DNA by scientists. It turns out the famous yeti finger is actually from a man. Article source: DNA testing reveals yeti finger is a fraud.

    Jan 3, 2012 9:25:00 PM
    Richard Stubstad said…
    Hi, there!

    Who is “Newsytype”?

    So far, I’ve only seen assertions such as the one above that “DNA testing reveals yeti finger is a fraud” and many similar conclusions — but no DATA?

    The first time I saw a complete 16,569 pair mitochondrial genome from a purported sasquatch, my conclusion was similar but not as categtorical. I simply concluded the truth with no conjecture: “within modern human ranges”.

    However, I did notice that this particular sequence was strange indeed. It appeared to be from a mitochondrial Eve who resided in sub-glacial Europe some 15,000 or more years ago, but with no perfect matches in Genbank.

    Then, when the complete mitochondrial genome came in for the second purported sasquatch sample — from the same year & over a thousand miles away from the first sample — lo and behold, it appeared to originate from the same mitochondrial Eve of Sample 1. This 16,569 pair sequence also was not present in GenBank.

    The odds of these two being two consecutive “frauds” to use the terminology from Newsytype, above, were less than 2%, statistically speaking.

    These two specimens were not only from two disparate and utterly disconnected research groups or individuals, they were from an extremely rare haplotype in the database commonly called “H-star” since no category has yet been established for this haplotype for lack of adequate mito DNA data.

    Later testing of a specific gene from the nuclear genome confirmed my suspicions: Each nuclear sequence differed by one or two sites from ANY modern human.

    If I were “Newsytype”, I wouldn’t conclude something such as the above without seeing the DNA DATA itself. It would have been easy for me to conclude the same thing from Sample 1, but I didn’t. I waited for more data and, especially, some nuclear DNA data — not the mitochondrial data which only indicates where one’s maternal roots from tens of thousands of years ago reside.

    What about the fraternal roots? What if we have, say, a kind-of hybrid, just like the Mule Deer of the mountain west is actually a hybrid from a whitetail female from today’s eastern North America and a Colombian blacktail from the pacific Northwest?

    Let’s see some DATA folks; otherwise this is someone’s random guesswork — in all likelihood based on partial mitochondrial DNA sequencing at best.

    Richard Stubstad

    Jan 5, 2012 2:30:00 PM

    What I’d like to see here is some intelligent discussion on the sequencing done by the folks in Scotland as I recall on the infamous “Yeti” finger, and how in the world the researchers reached such a conclusion without either sharing the data with anyone or without releasing the data themselves?

    In my view, this is why there is such great confusion about sasquatch: it actually appears to be a kind-of hybrid species, with near-modern human roots on the mitochondrial side and some other hominin or hominid roots on the nuclear side. If “researchers” continue to just conduct partial sequences, and especially if these tests are conducted on the mitochondrial side only, well then we’ll never know anything except their potentially premature conclusions and potential a-priori biases.

    If we depended on these highly educated scientists to tell us what a mule is based on their partial analysis of the mitochondrial DNA alone, we’d all be lead to believe that what we called a donkey was really a horse in disguise.

    Give me a break!

    Richard Stubstad

  19. ws

    Richard, any progress with your parallel study?

    • We have inquired with multiple outside-of-North America institutes and labs; presently, we havn’t decided where to turn, but the specimens are ready as soon as someone decides to look into the matter using proper DNA sequencing techniques and genomes; not what Scotland apparently did with the “Yeti Finger” mentioned above.

      I just can’t believe that everyone keeps making the same mistake. They appear to assume that the paternal origins are identical to the maternal origins.

      I doubt very much that any mammal on earth started out their lineage with an identical DNA match for both their “Eve” and “Adam”, as it were. It’s just that Homo sapiens sapiens appear to stretch so far back in time (more than 100,000 years for what scientists call “modern humans”) that the difference between our collective original Adam and Eve have been washed out, DNA-wise, thus obscuring the true origins of modern humans.

      Only recently has it been discovered that Neanderthal genes persist in ALL of us, apart from those clans that never left Africa to the tune of some 1-5% or so. Furthermore, Denisovan genes are present in Mellanesians to the tune of more than 5%, genetically, in addition to their 1-5% Neanderthal genetics.

      Virtually no one is “purely” from the same species on both the female and male sides.

      Especially sasquatch, which appears to me to have evolved parallel with archaic and/or modern humans much later than Denisovan or Neanderthal.

      Richard

  20. I’d like to correct some misapprehensions about Nature.

    You wrote “The source said that numerous people had written to Henry Gee, editor at Nature. He replied to all, stating that the paper had never been under consideration.”

    This is only true if ‘numerous’ equals ‘two’. And what I said was at the time the people contacted me, there was no paper by Ketchum under consideration.

    — Henry Gee

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s