Category Archives: Scholarship

Cultural Left Idiocy of the Day


This stuff is just getting nuttier and nuttier all the time, you know?

I am going to start posting this sort of insanity on a regular basis I think.


Filed under Animals, Cultural Marxists, Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Left, Man World, Pacific, Psychology, Regional, Ridiculousness, Romantic Relationships, Scholarship, Sex

Bigfoot News October 7, 2016

Warning: Long, Runs to 76 pages on the Net.

Yay! Another long awaited Bigfoot news! How bout that?


The famous Pennsylvania Bigfoot festival photo. Didn’t the photographer go back there and take a picture of the same spot, and these weird things were not there? This pic continues to be a mystery. Photographer seemed to be a reliable fellow.

Melba Ketchum DNA study replicated three teams by three different scientific teams! Of course in science, replication is everything. If you cannot replicate your findings, they are near-worthless, as all scientific findings must be replicated, usually not just once but a number of times.

Melba’s study initially was greeted with round of derision worse than you hear at a violent soccer match. Nearly the entire community trashed her without even reading her findings. A glum press conference was held in Texas starring several Bigfoot luminaries who all acted like they would rather be someplace else. See below about how there was not even any attempt to replicate the study by anyone in science. They simply said that the whole idea that Sasquatches exist is insane and they refused to read any further than that. Gotta love those capital-S Scientists!

Then for a long time nothing happened. But just recently I heard that the Ketchum study has been replicated not once, not twice, but actually three separate times!


Still from the great Danny Sweeten video. Another male “swimmer” type. Notice the long, elegant limbs and the somewhat akimbo limb style, the nonhuman strike, the apparent cupping of the hands and the appearance of a tall peaked cap in the head – really a coned head. The back story on this one is amazing. Danny Sweeten was hunting in the swamps of Texas when he surprised a sleeping Sasquatch under a tree. The Sasquatch leaped up and punched Danny in the face, knocking him down! Then it ran away very fast. However, Danny was still able to get a nice video of the thing running away. Danny had documented injuries to his face, and he visited a dentist as a result of getting hit in the teeth. The dentist visit is also documented. The video got a lot of airplay, and Sweeten became famous, but he didn’t make a nickel. Furious that he missed his chance at riches, Sweeten did what a lot of witnesses do, faked a video after shooting a real video. A year later, he shot a hoaxed video and turned it in, hoping this time to get the jackpot he missed out on. Sadly, he was caught red-handed and now Sweeten’s name is mud, and tragically, this clip is also badly tainted due to being shot by a known hoaxer. But I still believe that Danny Sweeten’s first video with the incredible back story is a true Sasquatch video. Sweeten is sort of a Shakespearean tragic character who falls on his sword. It’s an ancient trope, as old as man.

First replication of Ketchum’s findings. The first replication was by a man named Dr. David Swenson. He is a top genetics researcher who has published over 130 genetics papers in scientific journals. He was interested in the findings, but as he said in an interview, he had always thought that that Sasquatch was just a legend or a made-up story. He never believed it.

But he decided to look into Melba’s findings. He blasted them and took some time reading over what he saw. At first he just looked at one chromosome, and in the video interview he did, he only talks about looking at that one chromosome.

The skeptards have dismissed his findings because “he only looked at one chromosome.” But his findings were remarkable. He stated that in that one chromosome, he was able to validate Melba’s findings. He found that indeed this was the DNA of a hybrid that was half human on the female side and half some relict or older hominid on the male side. He was absolutely stunned and could not believe his findings. He discussed them in an interview with Joe Rogan. Rogan asked him if this meant that he believed that Sasquatches exist, and he hedged his answer, scientist that he is. He said:

“Well, I would not go this far. Let’s put it this way. One thing I know for sure is there is an unknown animal in the Pacific Northwest. Let’s just leave it like that.”

Some of the usual skeptards, mostly from one of the worst bunch of Bigfooters out there, the pond scum coagulating around this abomination of a Facebook group otherwise known as Skeptard Central, said I based my whole post on “second hand word of mouth.” Well of course. That’s how everything is in this field. People say things, I write them down and report them. What’s so wrong about that? That’s how this game works. We don’t have much of anything better than “second hand word of mouth” anyway. We haven’t proven jack about these things. We don’t even know they exist. All we have are “second hand word of mouth” sighting reports.

There. There’s the video above of Swenson discussing his replication of Ketchum’s findings. Now it’s not “second hand word of mouth” anymore, right? You satisfied?

Another skeptard argument, this one much more malicious (But what do you expect from skeptards?) was that Swensen is not credible because “he and Melba go way back.” So this distinguished genetic scientist is not credible because he is an old friend of Melba’s? This man is on the verge of committing scientific fraud in order to help an old friend! Wow, breathtaking accusation.

However, now I have learned that this is not true, and he has not known Melba for a long time. He only got interested in her after he heard about her study. And at that time, he didn’t even believe in Sasquatch! Then he did replication work and was stunned to discover that she was absolutely right! So if agreeing with Melba means “he and Melba go way back,” well then, I must say is that that is a pretty horrible argument, but it’s typical of the skeptards.

Another argument, not really by skeptards but nonetheless a skeptic rejoinder, is the one noted above that Swensen only looked at one chromosome, so the results are not valid. There is a bit of a point here, but how do you look at a single chromosome of any mammal and somehow conclude that it is a hybrid between a human female and a relict hominid male? I don’t get it.

On the other hand, I have now been able to kill that argument too. A source very close to Ketchum has told me that Swensen actually looked at the entire genome and then concluded the same thing, that it was a hybrid between a human female and an unknown relict hominid male.

So it looks like both skeptic arguments have been shot down on that one. Don’t worry, they will come back with new ones.


From a great clip. The clip is only a few seconds long and is called Bigfoot Crossing a Path. This is a still from the clip. The clip is very seldom seen, and this photo is not well known. Notice the hunched over position, the weird nonhuman squared off skull, and best of all, the sheen from real hair glowing in the sunlight. Costumes never have sheen, ever. Remember that.

Second replication of Ketchum’s findings. The second replication occurred when a lab team associated with an unknown university tried to replicate Ketchum’s findings. Apparently they thought the results were some sort of a joke, and they set out to prove that. They did use some of Ketchum’s actual samples. She still has quite a bit of samples left over from the old study. They had full institutional support until they concluded the study. They tested both NuDNA and MtDNA, and they replicated Ketchum’s findings in toto.

However the institution was only giving them support on the supposition that they would show that Ketchum’s findings were false. As soon as they replicated her findings, institutional support was pulled. The team said they were not going to publish their findings, as a replication of Ketchum’s findings would be a “career-killer” as they put it. However, they did inform Ketchum of the results. They also do not wish to be named for the same reason given for not publishing their findings.

From Ketchum’s Facebook page:

HUGE NEWS: Our research has now been independently verified genome wise. I don’t know when or how they’ll come out with it and I’m not at liberty to say who yet, but it’s finished and matches what we got down to the smallest details. Thank you, God!

Another post about the independent study from her FB page:

Thanks everyone for the kind words and prayers. It’s been a tough road but at some point the bad will be over since this independent study by acclaimed scientists will come out. Yippee.

Of course, skeptics will have a field day with this one, claiming that Ketchum is lying. But if she is lying about the results of another study, is that not scientific fraud? I believe it is. Scientific fraud is a very serious charge. It’s effectively a career-ender in science. Most people proven to have committed scientific fraud will never publish again. So I would just like to point out that when skeptics accuse Ketchum of making up these results, they are accusing her of scientific fraud, a very serious charge. Glad we cleared that up.

Update: The skeptards are already running crazy with this one, saying she has no evidence other than Ketchum’s own word. That is correct, but the whole reason that the team didn’t want to publish was because replicating Ketchum would mean the end of their careers. In fact, the support from the university was apparently contingent on proving Ketchum wrong. As soon as she was replicated, the university’s support ended.

But why did the team feel that way? Because of the despicable attitude created by the skeptards in the very first place, which now permeates “science” from top to bottom. But let us grant them that one. They are correct. All we have is Ketchum’s word on this one. But if this thing really has been replicated three different times now, this won’t be the last time. Replications will continue in the future and at some point, somebody is going to publish.

I specifically asked Richard Stubstad whether it was possible that Ketchum was fabricating the results, making stuff up or committing scientific fraud. He told me, “That is not possible.” Richard was a statistician, and he often reported his views in terms of statistical possibilities. So when he says that she could not have committed scientific fraud, he is saying that the odds of her doing that are so low as to be effectively nil. He told me that she was a good, sincere and morally proper scientist, and she just didn’t have it in her to commit scientific fraud. Keep in mind that Stubstad and Ketchum did not like each other at all. And even this man who did not like her said she was not capable of faking results.

Here is Ketchum reporting on the second replication of her study. There. Now it’s not “second hand word of mouth.” Satisfied?

Third replication of Ketchum’s results. I have just received word that a third lab has replicated Ketchum’s results at least in part. This lab came to Ketchum intrigued by her findings and said they wanted to try to replicate. Ketchum gave them some of her samples, and they went off to the lab. Unfortunately, they only tested MtDNA. But they did replicate her study in a sense.

First they used a hair specialist who found that the hair was not human and not that of any known animal. Then the MtDNA tested human, which is exactly correct. So you have proven nonhuman hair testing as human, and in a sense Ketchum is replicated again. It would have been nice if they would have done NuDNA, but they did not. I am not sure if this team is going to publish or not. I will have to ask my source about that.

The skeptards are also going nuts with this one, claiming it is “second hand word of mouth.” Correct, so far they have not published. But maybe they will. Anyway, all evidence must be reported, optimal or not.

Update on the Sierra Kills! I will not go into detail about the Kills, but you can look it up on the Net if you are interested. Briefly, Justin Smeja and an unidentified hunting partner shot and killed two Sasquatches on October 10, 2010 in the Plumas National Forest about 25 miles west of Sierra Valley. I am 100% certain that these kills occurred.

Yes, you heard of the Sierra Kills, but those were surely not the last Sasquatches to be killed by humans. An old friend of mine, in discussing the Sierra Kills case, admitted that it would never amount to anything for a variety of reasons, mostly because as he said, the people involved in the Sierra Kills both directly and peripherally (you know who you are) do not want anything to come of it.

Was Sasquatch flesh retained from the Sierra Kills? Yes. How was it retained? No one knows because Justin Smeja’s wild story about a dog digging through three feet of snow to find a piece of Bigfoot steak is now completely trashed by the fact that he has been carting around a piece of Black Bear to various DNA labs and having it tested and claiming that it is the same piece of “Sasquatch” that he sent to Ketchum. In doing this, Justin is in a sense negating his whole story, though I think his real mission is probably to make Melba look bad. I believe I know why Justin is doing this among other reasons, but I will not elaborate here.

We had a piece of Sasquatch (which was hilariously referred to as the Bigfoot Steak) that was retained from the Kills. This piece was proven to be a Sasquatch in one DNA study, which was then replicated by one scientist and two more teams.

Also we know that Justin (who I know fairly well) did not even believe in Sasquatch before this incident occurred. We know this because this is what all of his friends told us. In fact he openly ridiculed anyone who believed in it.

Until that fateful late afternoon in early October six years ago, when a large adult male Sasquatch and one his children, a juvenile Sasquatch, were shot and killed by Justin Smeja to the southwest of Mount Haskell in the Plumas National Forest in the Sierra Nevada.

What is the likelihood that someone who openly ridiculed those who believed in Sasquatches would concoct an insane story like this? Just about zero. For money? Justin hasn’t made a nickel off of this crazy story, and in fact, he told me that this incident had actually caused him to lose a lot of money. So what’s in it for him? Nothing. How about fame? Justin told me that the only fame he got was infamy, and that’s not the sort of fame that he wants.

Perhaps Justin is a crazy guy who just makes up crazy stuff. Well then, he had to get his very level headed hunter friend (Who refused to be shown on videotape – why if he is after fame?) to go along with this insane story. But I know Justin Smeja. Justin Smeja, whatever you think of him, and I actually like the guy, is probably one of the most level headed, no-BS men that I have ever met. If you were looking for the exact opposite of someone who would make up an insane story like this, Justin is your man.


This is a great still of a Yeti on a cliff in Russia. The film is only less than 10 seconds long. Look again at that long, slim, “swimmer” physique with the spindly, akimbo limbs and what looks like a coned head. It also seems to be cupping its hands backwards in the way that they do and that hoaxers never do. That also looks like real hair because it is shining in the sun. Suits never shine in the sun, ever. Photo is little known, and the video itself is not much watched anymore.

Road to Damascus conversions of Sasquatch witnesses. Since the killings, my understanding is that Justin has been much of his free time and certainly much of his summers up in the Sierras looking for Sasquatches. He now knows that they are real, and he is out to in a sense be vindicated for all of the humiliation that he went through. Rick Dyer Redux, but with a much better lead actor this time.

Now let us suppose that Justin made this story up for whatever nutty reason. Why on Earth, if he made up a stupid story, would he spend almost every free minute for the next several years up in the mountains hoping to see another Sasquatch? No one would do that. That’s absurd.

You see this over and over with witnesses. They see a Sasquatch, and it’s a Road to Damascus conversion. Their whole life changes, and in quite a few cases, they dedicate the rest of their lives to proving that these things are real. Bobby Short, Don Meldrum, John Bindernagel, Adrian Erickson, and Derek Randles are some of the names of the greats of our field who saw these things, sometimes just once, and then went on to devoting the rest of their lives to proving that they exist. I have known or extensively studied the histories of all of these people. Two are actual scientists. Bobby Short was a nurse. Derek Randles is one of the most no-bullshit guys you will ever meet.  Adrian Erickson saw Sasquatches four separate times.


Sasquatch doing a tree knock. Look at those very long spindly looking limbs with the odd tapered look. These types are males. Males are very athletic and are said to look like “swimmers.” They are sleeker and taller than the females who are stockier and shorter. I think this is from a video taken in woods of Michigan by a guy who was staying in a snowed in cabin for a couple of weeks. The video is in a snowstorm. The Sasquatch runs incredibly fast and moves its body in an inhumanly fast and Houdiniesqe fashion. The man who took the video thought this was a young male. He said that in the winter, the Sasquatches holed up deep in snowed-in backcountry and sort of almost hibernated. The older males, females and any young stayed back there. They sent the young males out to act as “scouts” to see if anyone was coming to their hideout. The video is very creepy and hard to find now.

The clincher from the Sierra Kills – juvenile Sasquatches with heads as big as five gallon buckets! One thing clinched the Sierra Kills story for me. When Justin first told a Canadian man over the phone about the Kills after his famous initial posting on, one of the things that he said was that the juvenile Sasquatch had a huge head, as big as a five gallon bucket. This fact is controversial in the community, but I believe it is true. You can see it in the Pancake Video from the ill-fated Kentucky Project.

Here a juvenile Sasquatch (a female named Matilda) is seen coming at night to grab some pancakes off of table where the pancakes were laid out for the Sasquatches at night. This may sound insane, but the female half of the couple at the site, Sissy, said she had been feeding the Sasquatches there for some time now. She learned this from her mother. Her mother had fed the Sasquatches for a long time, and she also fed them pancakes. So Sissy grew up as a girl with a mother who believed in Sasquatches and said she fed them on a regular basis. So when Sissy grew up, she knew the Sasquatches were still out there, so she continued the feeding.

The Erickson Project occurred when Adrian Erickson bought the Kentucky Project property on Mann Road in Crittenden, Kentucky where Sissy had been feeding the Sasquatches. He then stationed Leila Hadj-Chikh, who had a PhD in Ecology from Yale, along with Dennis Pfohl from Colorado at the house for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the Sasquatches that were there.

In the Pancake Video, a much ridiculed aspect of the video is that it portrays a child wearing a turban who comes up to the table at night to snatch the pancakes. However, that is no turban. It looks like a turban because juvenile Sasquatches for some reason have huge heads, as big as a five gallon bucket, as Smeja noted.

As soon as I heard that Justin had noted that the juvenile had a huge head, I knew he was telling the truth. That is because the fact that the babies have huge heads is known by almost no one other than a few Sasquatch experts. In fact, it is widely debated in the field, and some say that it is not even true that they have huge heads. But there is no way that someone like Justin, who did not even believe in Sasquatches, ridiculed anyone who did, and consequently had no interest in the ridiculous subject could possibly know this incredibly obscure fact about the juveniles having gigantic heads. Forget it. Not possible.

This photo is also very little known. I think it is from a video. The video is not very good quality and it was taken from some distance, but look at those weird, spindly, akimbo limbs again. You never see those in a hoax.

Bigfoot Steak or Black Bear Tenderloin – this is the question. Justin gave Melba a piece of what he thought was the Sasquatch that he killed. She tested it, and by DNA proved that it came from a Sasquatch. However, Justin and Melba then had a serious falling out. Justin then began carting around more pieces of what he claimed was the same flesh he gave to Melba to four DNA labs, all of which said the piece tested out bear.

The result of Justin’s DNA testing project? Melba Ketchum looks like a liar and an idiot for receiving a piece of bear and concluding that it was actually a piece of Sasquatch.

However, we now know that there are different pieces of flesh. The piece of flesh that he gave to Melba is not from the same flesh that tested out multiple times as Black Bear. The reports proving that we are dealing with two different pieces of flesh can be found here in scanned copies portrayed on Scott Carpenter’s great website, the Bigfoot Field Journal.

I believe the whole story of the Sierra Kills has not been told, which goes without saying, as Justin has been mysteriously toting around a piece of bear claiming it was part of a piece of Sasquatch he sent to Ketchum. However, I believe that there is much more to it than that, and in fact we will never know the true story of the Sierra Kills, in particular what happened after the Sasquatches were killed.

I will not elaborate further except to say that I heave dealt with my theories on this site a lot in the past, and all writing about it does is make people furious at me and call me a liar. There appear to be have been a number of Sasquatch killings in the last 200 years. Most of them are obviously clouded in mystery as all killings of unproven creatures are. I am quite sure that the Sierra Kills will fade into history as just one more Sasquatch killing story that is shrouded in mystery if not controversy like most of the rest of them. Enough of the Sierra Kills!


Bigfoot on South River, Ontario. Notice that walk again. Notice the cupped hands. Ever seen a hoax with cupped hands? Me either. Look at the coned head. It often looks like to me that they are wearing peaked Cat in the Hat cap or a ski cap. That is probably because those garments have a peaked look to them. Photo is little known.

The loathsome trashing of Melba Ketchum by Big Science. When Melba’s study first appeared, the scientific community first tried to ignore her like a fart in a crowd that everyone hopes will dissipate and will hopefully not be spoken of. We all know it’s there, it stinks like Hell, but we have all agreed that this is so embarrassing that no one should talk about it. Which pretty much sums up Big Science’s initial response.

However, the Bigfoot community was going bonkers over this study, mostly beating Melba over the head senseless with a verbal cudgel. At some point, Melba was the elephant in the room that Big Science could no longer ignore, probably because by now it’s pooping on the rug.

First they ignored her. Then they ridiculed her.

When ignoring her didn’t work, Big Science went to Plan B: Ridicule.

A few articles were published here and there, and mostly the community laughed her off as a pitiful joke. But they all had a good sadistic laugh at the poor woman ‘s expense. However the truth is that not one single scientist who trashed Ketchum even read the study. They simply dismissed it out of hand, which is typical of Mainstream Science and is one of my beefs with them and their Scientific God or Gods that they worship in so fundamentalist a fashion. Nor were any attempts made to replicate her findings. They simply looked at the title and findings, started laughing, threw the study on the floor, and asked the bartender for another round please. They turned the Trashing of Melba into a big party.

Melba in a sense botched the roll-out of the study in a variety of ways, but much of it was probably not her fault.

The Bigfoot community had a big laugh about the study despite the fact that, like Big Science, no one even read it. The performance of some of these clowns was disgusting. One histrionic wag often off his much-needed meds called her “the cat doctor” because she is a veterinarian. He nearly spit the phrase out with contempt when he said it. Over and over it was said that a veterinarian could not know anything about genetics.

However, Melba has published several studies on animal genetics in genetics journals, and she ran (poorly) a now bankrupt DNA lab in Texas. The lab specialized in animal genetics.

Further, Melba was called upon to take part in the DNA project to find the remains of victims killed in the 9-11 terror attacks. DNA was needed because there was almost nothing left of many of the victims. Hence, pieces of human were wrapped up and shipped to the DNA lab, where geneticists tried to match the piece of human to one of the victims. In this macabre manner, most if not all of the 9-11 victims were identified. Only the best geneticists in the US were even asked to participate in this process,  so the fact that Melba was chosen shows that she knows her stuff when it comes to genetics.

Further, before he died, Richard Stubstad told me that Melba, in addition to being brilliant, definitely knew her stuff when it came to genetics.


Hunter’s photos from Southeast Oklahoma, the caption says. I am not familiar with this photo, and it is little known. The first pic off to the left looks excellent. Look at that shaggy coat. I cannot tell you how many photos I have seen with a shaggy coat that looks just like that. You know how many hoaxer photos I have seen with a coat like that? Zero. Whatever that thing on the right is, I have no idea except that it is huge.

The saga of the Gigantic Sasquatch Lemur from 60 million years ago. The community had a huge guffaw over what they said was Melba’s claim that Sasquatches were actually gigantic lemurs from Madagascar that lived 60 million years ago. These lemurs actually existed way back then as we have learned from the fossil record. How these giant lemurs somehow leaped from an African island 60 million years ago to deep woods of the Pacific Northwest in our modern era without being spotted in the interim in either time or space is uncertain. Perhaps they rode some Sasquatch Lemur Time Warp. Who knows? See video below and say hello to Brad for me please.

Of course such a claim is absurd on its face, but her study was so poorly written (another botch, see below) that one could actually muddle through the fractured syntax and tortured prose to conclude that this was indeed the absurd claim she was making.

However, the truth is that Melba never said that Sasquatches were Giant Lemurs from Madagascar from 60 million years ago. That is a false reading of her paper. Instead she said that Sasquatches had a gene that caused their eyes to glow in the dark that traced back to these extinct Giant Lemurs from Island Africa. Got it? And yes, Sasquatches do have eyes that glow in the dark. There are many videos on Youtube showing this.


I always liked this photo. Credit to James Rosick. I think this was taken in Oregon, and I think they were hunting when this was taken. I believe the man in the foreground did not know that the thing was in the background. Do you see how the arms and legs are all akimbo like that? I have seen so many photos and even videos that look like that. I am certain this is real because I have never seen a fake with the arms and legs splayed out like that. You would think the hoaxers would get wise to it, but they never do.

Melba’s roll-out of her study was heavily botched, as noted above. She could not find a journal which would print her findings. It was in peer review at Nature, the flagship journal of science, for some time but was rejected there. Editors at other journals openly told her that their scientific careers would be destroyed if they ran her study in their journals. So Melba bought her own journal and changed the name of it in a rather underhanded and sleazy way, lying continuously the whole time she was doing this.

Then she claimed she did her own peer review with a few scientists and it passed. She never showed us any evidence of this review. I doubt if the study was ever peer-reviewed. She probably just lied and said it was so she might be regarded as even slightly serious. Alas, it was all for naught, as the study was rejected out of hand, peer review or no peer review. In addition, her rather sleazy shenanigans with the frankly vanity journal that she bought in order to run her study added to the ridicule and derision from the scientific community, not that I blame them, as the whole thing seemed pretty amateurish and had a bad smell to it.

The thing is that if your scientific study cannot pass peer review at a real scientific journal, you can always go out and create or buy a vanity journal, make it your own journal and then print your own stuff. You can even claim that you did your own peer review. In this sense, dubious findings which fail to even make it through peer review at refereed journals can be published by any scientist, amateur or professional, with a bit of cash and a lot of nerve and gall.

On the other hand, almost no one will take your vanity journal study seriously, similar to the way almost no one reads or takes seriously vanity books that are published on their own by authors in a similar fashion when they can’t find a real publisher. Vanity journals and publishers are the last refuge of throwaway studies and books that the industry thinks are so bad that they won’t even print a single copy. They are regarded as a joke category for, well, losers who can’t make it in publishing or science. Sort of, “If no one else thinks your work is any good, just publish it yourself!” Embarrassing.

Nowadays with self-publishing this is all changing somewhat, but still self-published books often have horrible layout, typeface, photos and proofreading no matter the quality of the actual writing, which is sometimes quite good. These books scream amateur so loudly you want to throw them across the room. So self-publishing, while a step up from the vanity presses of yore, continues to suffer from much the same credibility gap as the old presses.


I always liked this one. Another photo from Pennsylvania. Taken by an older farmer. Good backstory, and the farmer seemed very reliable.

Sad Erickson Project press conference. There was a nearly pitiful press conference held with in Texas with Melba, Adrian Erickson, Dennis Pfohl, and some other superstars of the scene. The presser was poorly handled. A few shocking snippets of Erickson’s Sasquatch videotapes from the Erickson Project were shown, but my sources tell me that a lot of the best material was withheld. For what reason? No one seems to know. Supposedly for a TV show starring Erickson which has not yet come to pass.

Melba rattled off her DNA findings. Nobody showed up for the presser, and it received almost no media. Adrian’s videos, including the fascinating one of Matilda, the young female Sasquatch from the Kentucky Project sleeping on the ground that could not have been faked, were laughed off again. There were also a few new videos, but they were not nearly as impressive as Sleeping Matilda. Erickson looked glum through the whole thing. Melba was earnest. Pfohl tried his best. The whole thing was embarrassing, but I think they tried their best.


OK, that is so weird. This resembles some of those weird White Sasquatch photos out of Texas. Taken at night as you can see. This photo is little known.

Adrian Erickson, failure and fool? Not so fast now! Adrian Erickson saw Sasquatches four separate times. After the last time, he reportedly said, “I am getting tired of seeing these things. I am going to prove that they exist.” Hence he spent $3 million of his own hard cash in an attempt to prove that they exist. The Erickson Project is typically regarded as a failure in which Erickson wasted his money.


What in God’s name is that? The caption says Sheep Farmer’s Shocking Bigfoot Video. OK, well, which video are we talking about here? Look at that stride. Humans don’t walk like that. And do you see some gray on the bottom of the foot?

However, he used that money to shoot some excellent Sasquatch video which was not faked, and he helped fund Melba Ketchum’s Sasquatch DNA project which not only proved that Sasquatches exist but has now been replicated by three separate scientific teams. Adrian, like Melba, has been heavily trashed by this episode (Melba openly states tragically that it ruined her career), however I believe that in the end, both will be vindicated and will come to be regarded as among the Greats of our field, up there with Roger Patterson, Bob Gimlin and the rest.


An extremely weird Sasquatch photo from Kentucky. Was this taken near the Janice Carter habituation site? I forget. There were all sorts of weird characters running around that site for a while snapping all manner of funny photos. Unfortunately the people taking the photos were so weird and marginal that no one much looked at them. This photo has always freaked me out. What the Hell is that?

Bryan Sykes DNA study. Here is Ketchum commenting on Brian Sykes going on Coast to Coast radio and attacking Melba’s DNA study:

I received a copy of the nicest email from a guy that wrote C to C. I wanted to share it. It humbles me when people are so gracious. It’s all of you here and people like this who sent this to my public page that make all of the hate bearable. I just want to thank all of you for your kind words, support, and encouragement. I love y’all! I haven’t heard back from George K. yet. I’ll keep you posted.

Hi George and George,

I’m a huge Coast fan and Coast Insider, and I literally listen to the show everyday. Usually, I am very happy with Coast, but today after listening to the show with Brian Sykes, I must say I am very upset. During his appearance with Dave Schraeder this weekend, he seriously and unfairly badmouthed Melba Ketchum and her amazing ground-breaking DNA study of Bigfoot.

Sykes was totally arrogant throughout the show and was obviously very ill-informed about Melba’s work, nonetheless he proceeded to trash talk her and her study. It was disturbing and unworthy of Coast. I know neither of you hosted the show, but I wanted to ask you to please give some airtime to Melba Ketchum to refute the baseless accusations that Sykes leveled against her and her study. Melba deserves a chance to address this. Thank you.


More posts from Melba about Sykes, all from her FB page:

Normally I just let all the garbage go, but Sykes is a scientist and has been nasty about our study, yet he’s not been at Oxford for many years (quote from Oxford) ,and without keeping up with the technology, you’re a dinosaur within a year or so at the rate technology is developing. He makes up an “institute” at Oxford to publish his paper, which you NEVER do (once again quoting Oxford as saying there is no such institute).

He disses bioinformatics, which is the most cutting edge analysis method for whole genomes known to mankind, preferring the “golden age of genetics”. His paper was proven wrong about the bear genetics by other geneticists, and they wrote a published response to the Royal Academy. All of this can be found in the UK press and the Royal Academy, so I’m not saying anything that’s not public knowledge.

He’s a mtDNA scientist, so he’s not skilled in all of the disciplines in our paper.

I’m not either on all of it – that’s why there are numerous authors in our manuscript. Each scientist wrote according to their discipline. Like the bioinformatics was written by the bioinformaticist. The electron microscopy by the head of that department at Texas A&M and so forth. I’m only the lead author and therefore responsible for answering the questions and correspondence for it, writing my part, and putting it all together.

We used 12 labs and they used one US mtDNA lab, not Oxford and only tested a small portion of the mtDNA loop. No other genetic testing was done..

And after all of this, he has the audacity to diss our work. How unprofessional and naive. Bless his heart. I can prove ours is not contaminated by human or other mammals. I did a video on it. He forgets I’m a forensic scientist, and all crime scenes are subject to contamination, so I know how to make sure it’s not there.

One more thing. SYKES CONTACTED ME before his paper, and I offered him full access to samples, research and even offered to take him to the habituation site. I have the emails. Then he contacts me back and says he’s not coming. He didn’t even have to come here to have access to everything, but he blew me off after I offered everything. So that speaks a lot for his wanting to get to the truth. I don’t say anything I can’t prove, and I have the emails to back this up. If he had worked with me, he would know why the seven Sasquatch samples in his study wouldn’t run. It took us months to figure this out. In his paper he says he doesn’t understand why they didn’t run, but I know…

I think it would be very interesting to figure out why those seven samples would not run at all.

Reason Bryan Sykes study failed. Sykes was given a very large number of all sorts of samples. Apparently a number of them were from Sasquatches, but quite a few others were from known animals or even people.

My contact at Ketchum’s study gave me the rundown on her group’s opinion of what went down in the Sykes study:

Sykes used a hair specialist to look at his samples before he used them. What the purpose of this hair specialist was is not known, since he didn’t appear to screen much of anything. The Ketchum camp believes that Sykes’ hair specialist knew what Sasquatch hairs look like. They do have a characteristic quality that makes them look like no known animal, nor do they appear human, though they look more human than anything else.

Ketchum’s people felt that the hair specialist had specifically weeded out all of the Sasquatch samples and only sent samples of known animals and humans to Sykes, possibly disposing of all of the Sasquatch samples. Why he would do this is not known, but the contact told me that there are a number of researchers who are either professionally jealous of Ketchum or for one reason or another want to discredit her study. The contact implied that Sykes or at least his hair specialist was one of those.

“The fix is in,” he told me in relation to this and a number of other professional attempts to sabotage or discredit Ketchum’s findings.

Major proponents of Ape Theory know they are wrong! A war has been going on for a long time in the scene between proponents of the Ape Hypothesis, which states that Sasquatches are apes, and believers in the Hominid Hypothesis, which states that they are a type of people, albeit prehistoric men.

An anonymous source who is very deep into the scene has told me that a number of the major proponents of the Ape Hypothesis know that they are wrong and know that Sasquatches are a type of hominid, but they feel that if they change their theory now, their careers will be over. He named a few names, but I am not going to repeat them here. Suffice to say that they are people that everyone in the scene has heard of. Now don’t any of you big proponents of the Ape Theory go writing me angry mails now! I didn’t name any names, right? Could be anyone, right?

But this sure is shocking news!

Are Ape Theory proponents sabotaging Hominid Theory people? According to a source very deep into the scene, sabotaging is really the wrong word to use. Instead, the Ape Theory people systematically ignore all evidence that does not fit in with their theory. They dismiss Ketchum’s DNA study on hazy or shaky grounds, and when on TV, they simply never mention it. They more or less act like Ketchum’s paper does not even exist.

However, I have good evidence that well-known Ape Theory proponent Matt Moneymaker has sabotaged a number of sighting reports in his database by removing witness accounts that describe the Sasquatch as looking human. Richard Hucklebridge was run off the BFRO because he confronted Matt over his alteration of data. Wow! Matt Moneymaker altering scientific data to fit it into his pet theory! Sleazy or what?

Sasquatches actually cloak! I know this sounds completely insane, and for a long time, I laughed at the people who believed in cloaking, as I thought they were were woo types. However, now an anonymous source who is also an excellent researcher presented me with some evidence that Sasquatches actually do cloak. He showed me a photo of a cloaking Sasquatch and outlined the Sasquatch in red ink. You could indeed see an indistinct shadow there.

He told me that Sasquatches cloak by using their infrasound to bend light waves, making them appear to be somewhat invisible. They’re not actually invisible, but they look instead like an indistinct light shadow that could be anything. Apparently via infrasound you may be able to bend light waves to produce this effect. It’s quite amazing, and this is a scientific explanation that could theoretically actually make sense.

This clears up so many things. Remember all the reports of Sasquatches vanishing into thin air, even in the Arizona and Texas desert? I always thought that was completely insane, but there have been so many reports that you start to wonder. There was once a page up called Desert Sasquatch that included a lot of these weird reports along with a lot of other very woo stuff. However, the female author was scientific minded and offered possible scientific solutions (highly speculative of course) for how the Sasquatches could be doing some of these woo things. She also had a theory for the “Sasquatch disappearing into thin air” observations.

Notice how many times people report that these things are impossible to see? Maybe that’s because they cloak much of the time they are around us!  Notice how many people say you only see them when they want you to see them? Well, maybe we only see them when they take their cloaking off in order to be seen for some reason!

Another thing that I have noticed so many times is that people take photos of videos where they can’t see much of anything in the background or at least there are certainly no Sasquatches. They just shoot a video of a hike, the forest outside their cabin or the field next door. It is only when they go in to look at the photos or video that they shot that they notice the Sasquatch that they somehow could not see at the time! Now I am wondering if this cloaking only works on the human eye and not on cameras. After all, eyeballs and photo lenses work in completely different ways.

Perhaps the human eye is subject to this light-bending effect but cameras are not? If that is so, then that is an excellent explanation for all of the cases we have of people shooting photography with nothing in the background but landscape and only seeing the Sasquatch after they are looking at the film or video later on. That’s because the Sasquatch was invisible to the human eye but not to the camera lens. It’s just a theory, but it would explain a major problem in Sasquatch sightings which is how Sasquatches unseen at the time of the photographing suddenly show up later when you are looking at the film.

This is one of the most fantastic Sasquatch videos I have ever seen. It is from Sasquatch Ontario. The fellow who runs that organization is named Mike and is despised by most everyone in the scene because he refuses to cooperate with other researchers and fights with almost anyone. Apparently he is a complete SOB.

But this video is simply incredible. Notice the obviously cloaking Sasquatch in the background speaking and singing to the researcher. This has been called a hoax, but how in the Hell do you hoax that? How do you make that perfectly-shaped thing in the background, and why would you make it so indistinct like that? Is Sasquatch Ontario a special effects studio? I don’t think so.

I know someone who is familiar with Mike and has been out to his habituation site. This man told me that Mike is 100% real, and he is not hoaxing at all.

Now once you accuse someone of hoaxing, shouldn’t you prove it? OK, people say this video is hoaxed. Got any evidence that it’s hoaxed? Can you prove it? Well if you have no evidence, then be quiet about the hoaxing charge!

The bizarre method of Sasquatch speech. As you can see in the video above, that thing is speaking in the strangest way. The latest theory for why Sasquatches sound so damn weird is because they speak on the inhale instead of speaking on the exhale as we do. That thing in the video is speaking and singing on the inhale! No wonder it sounds so weird. Try speaking on the inhale if you can manage it, and see how it sounds. Isn’t that weird? Why the Hell do they speak on the inhale?

And one more thing, if you were going to hoax a Sasquatch talking, why in God’s name would you record the human hoaxer speaking on the inhale of all things? No one would do that. Further, some of the sounds being produced by that thing seem to beyond the range of the human vocal tract.

Possible Sasquatch seen on Survivorman! Les Stroud did a Survivorman show for a couple of years on TV. The show was broken up into a number of parts, and then the parts were further broken up into Parts 1 and 2. There were at least eight separate Survivorman Bigfoot portions. The labeling looked like say Survivorman Bigfoot 7, Part 1, for example.

No one knows what is in this video. Some are saying it is a tree, a stump, a shadow or a rock. It could not have been hoaxed because Stroud does not hoax. Not only that, but this possible Sasquatch was not seen until the show appeared on TV! It was only then that watchful viewers noticed the possible Sasquatch in the background. Stroud and the camera crew didn’t even know the thing was there! Of course, once again we see a case where the humans at the scene saw nothing, and the Sasquatch only shows up later on the camera. This may be due to cloaking, but that’s just my theory.

I do think this is a Sasquatch because that is exactly what they look like. Not only that, but nothing else in the background is the same shade of black as that object. Most importantly, the black object has a sheen to it. Rocks, trees, stumps, and shadows don’t have a sheen, especially on a cloudy day with no sun out. But true Sasquatch videos often have sheen. This is because as I noted above, real Sasquatches have oils on their skin under their hair.

This gives them, and presumably any other living thing with such skin oils, a sheen to their coats. It’s notable that not one single proven hoax has even had sheen to it, nor have hoaxers even tried to replicate this sheen, maybe because they can’t. Obviously suits will not have sheen because they are worn over a clothed human body. There’s no skin oils for the suit to contact, and the suit’s not real hair on a real body anyway.

Survivorman Bigfoot show at the Alberta Habituation Site! There was one portion, Show 7, shot at this famous site which only I have written about. Show 7 has Parts 1 and 2. It’s labeled Nordegg, Canada. If you have been reading me, that is almost exactly where I implied that the AHS was! Stroud went out to the AHS with Todd Standing. It’s been Todd’s site for some time now ever since the weasel deceived other researchers to find out where the secret site was and then stole it from other researchers and claimed it for his own. It was here at this Nordegg site that Jeff Meldrum saw what may have been his first Sasquatch walking across a clearing in the middle of the night.

A lot of people say I am full of it, but I wrote about this site for a long time, describing approximately where it was. I also told the story about how Todd stole the site from other researchers and how it was now his site. Then Stroud goes out to Nordegg, Canada with Todd Standing, presumably to the AHS. So all of my reporting on the AHS has been vindicated as true!

I haven’t watched this episode yet, but if you want to see some real footage of the AHS, here it is!

The terrible tale of the Alberta Massacre! Some absolutely shocking news from Todd Standing. As noted above, Todd has finally had a good habituation site after all these years. The nice thing about that is that now that Todd has a nice site, he doesn’t have to hoax anymore. Why hoax when you have a great Sasquatch habituation site sitting right at your heels. Why bother? I am not sure what sort of work Todd has been able to do out there, but he did bring Survivorman out for a couple of episodes and he also brought Jeff Meldrum out. It was on this occasion that Meldrum saw what may have been his first Sasquatch.

Now the stunning word in from Standing is that most of the Sasquatches at the AHS have been killed! A source reports that Todd said recently that he was out there at the AHS one night when some military helicopters flew in with guns blazing away. They flew around for some time firing their machine guns at the forest below, and then they flew away. Todd said after that, most of the Sasquatches were gone except for one young male who had become very shy. The assumption was that somehow the Canadian military had killed a number of the Sasquatches with helicopter-mounted machine guns.

If it’s true, it’s an incredible story, up there with the Sierra Kills. First the Sierra Kills, next the Alberta Massacre! If anyone has any more information about this incident, please contact me.

I would like to say that it is my personal opinion that the militaries in North America may do this from time to time. I believe that some Sasquatches become nuisances, possibly due to excessive aggression or killing and eating people (Hello David Paulides). In these cases, I believe the military may be called out to kill the problem Sasquatch. Unfortunately, I have no evidence to prove this, and it is just a hunch on my part.

If this is occurring, it would be nice if we could gather some evidence about it. I am aware of one incident where a Sasquatch was seen in a national forest. I forget the details. Anyway, the witness said that soon after the Sasquatch was seen, a US forest service helicopter was flying low over the forest where the Sasquatch was seen firing a machine gun. The exact same scenario that Todd reports here.

Of course, Todd has a history of hoaxing going back some time now, from his stupid Tiki doll puppets to his made-up lie about “Sylvanic,” the secret valley that does not exist that he accessed through a hole in a mountain where he was attacked by Sasquatches one night around his campfire. There is even a video of this made-up incident out there that you can watch.

Well, Todd is a filmmaker and filmmakers, well, they make films! So Todd likes to make movies. And he has quite an imagination.

However, Todd gets mixed up between fiction and nonfiction and what really happened and what didn’t. This nonsense leads to lots of unnecessary confusion, and it’s borderline immoral if not worse. Blair Witch Project anyone? How about Megamouth Shark? How about fakeumentaries?

I figure there is way too much lying masquerading as truth these days as it is without throwing in all this fakeumentary garbage. What’s the point? Don’t we get lied to enough all day long in this idiotic country? As it is, if you want to be informed, you have to spend about half your day figuring which of what you got told today were lies and which were facts. It’s not easy at all to disentangle them, and it’s very annoying to say the least that we have to play Lie Detector all day long anyway. I thought this was some great “democracy?” If it’s this great democracy, then why do we get lied to all day? Huh? Riddle me that.

Anyway I doubt if Todd made this up, as he stopped hoaxing as soon as he finally got a real habituation site if not before. Now Todd had this nice comfy habituation site, one of the best in North America, with a number of Sasquatches that I was told “aren’t going anywhere.” In other words, they were not going to leave the AHS barring extreme circumstances.

So I doubt if they up and left. So if they are still there, why make up a story about them getting killed? Why not stay out there and study them? I guess you could say that they left for some other reason, so Todd made up this massacre lie. But I was told that these Sasquatches were not going anywhere for much of any reason. So they didn’t leave. But they’re not there, otherwise Todd would still be studying them. So where did they go? Well, they didn’t leave as I said. So maybe they did get killed.

Todd suffers from Boy Who Cried Wolf Syndrome like a number of other researchers. It’s a real problem when you shoot some real stuff, then you hoax, then you shoot some more real stuff. People see you hoaxing and write off everything you did. Todd’s a jerk for hoaxing in the first place, but I think this story may be true.


Filed under Animals, Apes, Bigfoot, California, Canada, Eurasia, Genetics, Government, Mammals, Michigan, Midwest, North America, Northeast, Oregon, Regional, Russia, Scholarship, Science, South, Texas, USA, West, Wild

Glaciers Are Sexist

Glaciers, Gender, and Science

A Feminist Glaciology Framework for Global Environmental Change Research

  1. Mark Carey
  2. M Jackson
  3. Alessandro Antonello
  4. Jaclyn Rushing

Mark Carey, Robert D. Clark Honors College, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR 97403, USA. Email: carey{at}


Glaciers are key icons of climate change and global environmental change. However, the relationships among gender, science, and glaciers – particularly related to epistemological questions about the production of glaciological knowledge – remain understudied. This paper thus proposes a feminist glaciology framework with four key components: 1) knowledge producers; (2) gendered science and knowledge; (3) systems of scientific domination; and (4) alternative representations of glaciers.

feminist glaciology, feminist political ecology, feminist postcolonial science studies, folk glaciology, glacier impacts, glaciers and society

No, seriously, this is not a joke. See here.

Apparently, according to science, glaciers are sexist. Who knew?

I would say they are also racist. I mean come on, they are lily White! Ever seen a Black glacier? Ever seen a MexicanT glacier? Me either. So glaciers exist in a de facto Jim Crow/apartheid segregated environment in which Black and Mexicant glaciers are excluded from existing via pure glacier racism.

Future strategies to combat this injustice may include busing (busing glaciers from one place to the other via glacier buses to relive glacier-caused inequity, forced integration by the creation of alternate forms of glaciers such as Black glaciers and Mexicant glaciers in order to increase much needed glacier diversity, and affirmative action by promoting more diverse glaciers in the literature which is dominated by boring and oppressive descriptions of “dead White glaciers.”

The Cultural Left has been bordering on self parody for some time now but recently they have gone so full retard that you literally cannot tell the difference between actual Cultural Left stuff and their enemies sarcastic attempts to make fun of them.


Filed under Environmentalism, Geography, Global Warming, Humor, Radical Feminists, Ridiculousness, Scholarship, Science

A Brief Rundown on the Academia Website

Who joins the website? Contrary to popular myth, the site is not just for working and emeritus academics

Sort of helps if you are going to a university or better yet graduated from one. Grad student? The site awaits. Got a Masters? Better yet. Got a PhD? Now you’re talking. Postdoc? Academia was made for you.

Yes, many actual working or emeritus academics are on the site. The site is used by them to publish work of theirs that they are ok with putting in the public domain for free.

But it can also be used by independent scholars, which is what I am in addition to holding a graduate degree in the Humanities. There are quite a few independent scholars out there. In some cases, some of the best and most cutting edge work in the field is being done by them.

Independent scholars and better yet people with graduate degrees can also and often do publish in academic journals, write academic books and sit on review boards for academic journals. Actually, I am an independent scholar, and I actually sit on a review board for an academic journal published in the Near East.

In addition some excellent work is published in academic journals by people who are actually working in the field outside of academia. For instance, in a lot of chemistry and engineering journals, scientists working in the private sector publish most of the information. Their research is of course funded by their corporate employer.

In addition to publishing work by academics and scholars, there are many impromptu peer review sessions on there. On the right side of the homepage it says Sessions. There will be a few sessions up there that Academia thinks I may be interested in listed. Some folks who have written a paper that is not yet published put it out on the site for impromptu peer review. They invite other scholars to participate in the session or you just ask to join.

The debate can get pretty ferocious at times. I just came from a session on the laryngeal theory of Proto Indo European or PIE. This is one of the oldest long-standing problems in PIE Historical Linguistics. They were going at it like wildcats in there, and some of the people in the session were tearing into the rather arrogant and narcissistic academic who wrote the paper.

1 Comment

Filed under Higher Education, Indo-European, Indo-Hittite, Language Families, Linguistics, Scholarship

Historical Linguistics Mired in Stick in the Mud Conservatism

Historical Linguistics if one of the more brutal subfields in Linguistics, probably because you can hardly prove much of anything.

It involves reconstruction of dead languages or earlier aspects of existing languages. The dead languages have left no record and are often 7-10,000 years old. The earlier phases or existing tongues also have left no record.

So it is unprovable guesswork guessing at what ancient languages looked like, with no real way to prove if anyone is right or wrong because the languages no longer exist.

On top of that, the field has become mired in stick in the mud conservatism such that I doubt if any new ancient language families are going to proven in my lifetime. The conservatives keep moving the goalposts, and no evidence is ever good enough.

Being a Historical Linguistics conservative is the hip and cool thing to be in Linguistics, and the peer pressure in the field is worse than an eighth grade playground. If you take a liberal position that says that some ancient language family like Altaic exists, the peer pressure on you as a fraud, idiot, kook, crank and loser is unbelievable. I am amazed that there are any liberals left promoting daring new ideas on ancient language families.


Filed under History, Linguistics, Scholarship

Sokal on the Cultural Left

I confess that I’m an unabashed Old Leftist who never quite understood how deconstruction was supposed to help the working class. And I’m a stodgy old scientist who believes, naively, that there exists an external world, that there exist objective truths about that world, and that my job is to discover some of them. -Alan Sokal

Sokal of course is the professor who was the author of the Sokal Hoax in which Sokal wrote a fake article that made absolutely no sense whatsoever and submitted it to a Cultural Left deconstructionist type journal. Incredibly, the journal published it. Later Sokal admitted that he had written the article as a prank to show that decontructionists in modern academia ultimately are not saying anything that either makes sense or has any substance at all.

By this hoax he showed the modern academic obsession with postmodern deconstructionism to be essentially pure nonsense and abstruse blathering on and on about nothing.

Ultimately the postmodern deconstructionist Cultural Left university crowd is writing a lot of very fancy articles full of thousand dollar words that are very hard to understand but which reveals at its core puzzling statements that seemed nearly opaque to anything resembling comprehension.

I read (or at least look at them since there’s no point in bothering to read them) quite a few papers like this on the academia site on a regular basis. In certain fields in the social sciences, most if not all papers being written are coming from this ludicrous and even disturbing point of view which is something like PC on steroids.

Above Sokal pens something above that would not look out of place in the Alt Left. In fact, it goes along well with our views.


Filed under Culture, Higher Education, Left, Philosophy, Scholarship, Useless Western Left

Just Wrote for 24 Hours Straight

I just spent 24 hours pretty much doing nothing but writing. Well to be precise, I was writing and reading – reading stuff to research for my writing, but it was all for the same project.

And I couldn’t be happier. I was happy as a clam the whole time. It wasn’t even work really. It was more like going on vacation or going off somewhere fun for the weekend. It’s pretty much of a joke to even call this work. It would be like having a job where you got paid for doing nothing but having fun.

Of course it was stressful in a sense (but I enjoy that sort of stress) because the sort of work I was doing was sort of like academic research that might go into a journal or an academic publication, something along those lines. So it’s scientific writing in a sense. One thing about doing scientific writing or any sort of scientific research is that you’re wrong.You’re wrong all of the time. And you’re always figuring out how you were wrong and going back and changing stuff. Eventually after however many revisions, you probably have something down that is more or less correct at least for now.

There is also a lot of reorganization going on for flow and structure and at the sentence level for typos and better structured and flowing sentences. Redundant material needs to be removed, all the time. You are always finding different parts of the paper that finally start matching up to each other, and you spent a lot of time marrying them.

Furthermore, your source material is often simply wrong or even unscientific.

I have to deal with nationalism a lot in my work, and nationalism is hardly ever rational, scientific or even correct. It’s just wrong, usually a good part of the time. Nationalist narrative for most any nationalist group tends to be an endless series of lies with a fair amount of correct material thrown in. But the correct material gets exaggerated or extended. Ethnic nationalist ideology boils down to

Our group is 100% good, and we love them, and all the other groups, especially the ones nearby who are more like us than any other groups on Earth, are 100% evil and tell nothing but lies.

Nationalist discourse is not only not rational or logical, it’s usually not even correct. Why not just read fairy tales instead?

Given that nationalist discourse is usually just an endless pack of lies, exhaltations and condemnations, it’s hard to see how any rational person could be taken in by it. But you will find in Europe that in any country you study, most any person you meet is some sort of an ethnic nationalist retard. This includes PhD students, full PhD professors, celebrities, noted scholars, etc. That these folks are said to be scientists is particularly shocking because they are so full of shit. However, they are social scientists, and most social scientists are not even practicing science anyway.


Filed under Ethnic Nationalism, Europe, Nationalism, Political Science, Regional, Scholarship, Writing

Why Most Social Sciences and Social Scientists are Pitiful, Laughable and Absurd

It seems cruel to say that most social sciences are jokes and most social scientists are clowns, but that’s really the sad and painful, even heartbreaking, truth.

Generally speaking, most social scientists are not even practicing science anyway. They just say they are. I do not know what they are practicing. Maybe politics, ideology or propaganda. Most social scientists are ideologues of some sort or another. It’s pretty hard to find a rational. And what is stunning about these social scientist retards is that they are always going on and on about,

“Our science has proved this! Our science has proved that! You’re anti-scientific!”

They are always accusing their ideological opponents of not practicing science. This is usually done by taking apart their opponents’ work in petty ways with a fine tooth comb and searching for any error that they might find.

All scholarship has errors or at least is saying things that are either false now or will be proven false later. And your typical scholar doesn’t know everything. He usually doesn’t even know everything about his own field, though your typical social scientist retard always claims he does. Because it’s pretty much impossible to even get a grasp on the totality of facts even in your own petty subfield, everyone’s scholarship is wrong in some way or another simply because it’s impossible to know everything about the subject.

So you have laughable nonscientists who claim to be practicing science screaming at their opponents that the opponents are not practicing science and therefore the opponents’ conclusions are wrong.

Pretty much two sets of morons, each practicing nonscience but calling it science, screaming at each other, claiming to be upholding science and screaming at their opponents for being incompetent, unreliable or unscientific. If one error is found in an opponent’s paper, this means we need to throw out the whole thing. You often hear people say about even widely published scholars,

“This guy is unreliable. I doubt if you will find even one factual sentence in anything he writes, even a 500-page book.”

In this way, they completely dismiss their opponents and often even refuse to read their work, effectively boycotting them.

Everyone who has not hyperspecialized is called a dilettante because you can only be a scholar on one idiotic hyperspecialized microfield. Beyond that, it’s assumed that you know nothing, and everything you say is wrong. The Renaissance Man is dead, buried long ago and no longer even mourned. Instead, absurdly, his death is celebrated as a victory for science and truth! The words dilettante and amateur get thrown around a lot at even widely published ideological opponents.

Everyone on one side of the debate will line up on one side and robotically recite all of the charges of his side, rarely if ever questioning even one of them because if you do, you are now not with us, the good guys, you are with our ideological opponents who are if not evil (and often they are called evil) are at least utterly incompetent and not even worthy of being read.

So there is profound ideological conformity on both sides. You have two groups of antiscientific ideological fucktards screaming at each other and accusing the other one of not practicing science, when honestly, probably neither side is practicing science, so any such charge is hypocritical.

Petty feuds are everywhere. Scholar A will not speak to scholar B and hates his guts. A good number of scholars probably hate each other, but they run around all the time pretending that they don’t because hatred is “unscientific.”

Unanswered emails are common, and so are unanswered phone calls are probably too, but I have not experienced that yet. Many scholars get a huge head, use the excuse of being busy all the time to ignore their emails and screen all their phone calls. There are quite a few scholars who simply cannot be reached ever for any reason short of finding out their office hours and showing up. Screening out all your calls and emails is the sign of an open mind, it is not?</sarcasm>.

Worst of all is that every field has a list of things that have been “proven as facts” in that field. In the real sciences, these facts have actually been proven so at least they are facts and at least true for now, I will grant them that. But then even in the real sciences, these sets of facts become set in stone and the question is considered to be conclusively answered for all of time, when really science doesn’t conclude much of anything for all of time, and pretty much everything is supposedly up for grabs, but that’s not really the way it works.

The reigning paradigm gets set in stone in a way, and everyone in the field rigorously or even ferociously defends the paradigm as if it is the proven set of facts for all of time instead just temporary facts as all science is.

Scholars, often in frightening lockstep unison, condemn all attacks on whatever the reigning paradigm is, and the reigning paradigm is often demonstrably and even laughably false anyway, but once a paradigm gets set, the fake open-minded scientist becomes as closed-minded as any religious fanatic.

New data challenging any reigning paradigm (the paradigms are treated nearly the same as revealed works are treated in religions) is viciously attacked or simply dismissed altogether. It is quite common for papers or data attacking a dominant paradigm to be viciously attacked all around the field, with many reviews showing how the conclusion is wrong. Yet few if any of the critics even try to work out the data or even test it out to see if the conclusion even true. They just yell,

“The conclusion is false!”

often without even examining the data in question. Persons challenging paradigms are called antiscientific and are accused of practicing pseudoscience, a word which pretty much has no meaning because scientists change the definition every month or so. Ideally it means conclusions that do not even follow the scientific method at all, but generally it is just means all of the arguments attacking whatever the stupid paradigm of the moment is. Pseudoscience is just the “paradigm-attacking stuff I don’t like.”

As I said, every field has paradigms. Physics envy and all that, but at least the real sciences have paradigms that are by now proved pretty well. But are they the end of the debate as science says every paradigm is? Well of course not! Nevertheless even in the real sciences, paradigms are defended with near-religious faith and a great deal of emotion.

The social sciences of course are so much worse because they aren’t even sciences in the first place! Every social science has a “set of facts” that everyone in the field has to believe. These are the paradigms of that particular field, and they are defended with all of the ferocity that an SJW defends their politics.You are not even allowed to work in that field if you reject one or more paradigms. It is said that that person “doesn’t even accept the basic facts of our field” and hence must be ignored.

There really is no alternative to accepting those paradigms. You might be able to do so quietly, but don’t try to publish anything attacking any of their often-moronic paradigms or you will be sorry.

Moronic is a harsh word. but it’s necessary when discussing social science paradigms. Many social science paradigms are simply (usually PC) “facts” that are accepted by everyone mostly because they are politically correct and not because they are grounded in any facts. Usually there is a grain of truth in there somewhere, but still the paradigms are more about ideology than science. If you examine a lot of these paradigms, they fall apart, often immediately and obviously, and really any commonsense Joe on the street would laugh and say,

“Of course that’s not true!”

The social scientists then yell that the man on the street knows nothing compared to the anointed scientists of the field. Social science often appropriates the real sciences, usually for political and emotional reasons. If any man on the street rejects whatever the latest stupid PC paradigm is, the social scientists will appropriate real science and argue, for instance, that no way does the man on the street know more about astronomy than astronomers.

But we aren’t talking about real sciences. We are talking about the PC fake sciences called social sciences. So you can see that social scientists throw themselves in with the real scientists and marry their field to the real scientists’ one whenever it is convenient for them.

Nevertheless, social scientists spend a good amount of time engaging in sheer nihilism. Since social sciences typically involve humans, the excuse is made that humans are endlessly variable, and there is no way to control for all of these variables, hence apparently no non-physical scientific conclusions can be made about humans at all! If you try to formulate one, social scientists will jump up and yell about the exceptions. Yet of course exceptions prove the rule even in the real sciences, say in medicine.

So the social scientist frequently answers most of the major questions someone might have about the field with either a regimented and evangelical recitation of whatever the typically unproven paradigms are, or for many questions, the social scientists simply utilizes nihilism and says that this is a question that cannot be answered by our field.

What’s a question that can’t be answered? Well, just about anything is! So when presented with a set of questions about what the field has proven about this or that, the social scientist simply spends a lot of time stating,

“There is no way to test that. There is no way to design such a test ever. But what about the exceptions – because of exceptions, we can never prove anything about anyone. All conclusions are based on averages and how do you know the average is even correct?  Maybe it is totally wrong!

Because you can never test out all humans on this question or that, everything disliked is thrown out by attacking sample size or method. And even if you could test out every human on Earth on this question or that, any conclusion that overthrew any paradigm would be tossed out anyway by attacking method.

Also it really doesn’t matter how rigorously you design your experiments and how carefully you your average out your conclusions because they will just attack study design anyway if it attacks a paradigm. The person being attacked then asks in exasperation,

“Well then how to we design such a study to test out this question?”

90% of the time, the social scientist simply falls back on nihilism and says this question cannot be answered ever by anyone or this is not a question that our field even deals with, and they toss it over to some other field like political science or sociology and tell them to answer the question.

Of course, asking sociologists or politicians to correctly answer any scientific question is a dubious endeavor, as most conclusions there are simply arrived via arbitrary, often nonsensical, hypocritical, ridiculous and ferociously antiscientific methods which are then explained away as “politics.” Well you know politics is mostly just people lying about one thing or another for ideological reasons, so the “political” conclusions arrived at are usually laughable because there is no science going on whatsoever. Instead there’s just emotionalism and bullshit.

Saying this question or that cannot be answered by our field (who ought to be the ones at least testing it out) is really just a big dodge.

As you can see, the field typically says that the question incredibly has no answer or they say even more wildly that it is a question that cannot even be tested in their first place! Of course, philosophically speaking, there are no questions that lack answers, so this is just another one of their lies. Sure, there are questions that don’t have answers yet that have been determined by humans, but I assure you that there is some scientific answer to the question, but it’s often one that is difficult for humans to figure out, so humans just throw up their hands and say,

“There is no way to determine this one way or other,”

which is something social scientists say a lot.

Emotions run wild in the social sciences. While scientists are supposed to be emotionally constrained at least in their published statements, social scientists seem to be a lot less controlled, and language in debates is often excessively harsh for proper scientific debate, but as no one is practicing science anyway, who cares!

As you can see, most social sciences are absurd endeavors because they don’t even bother to answer most of the important questions in the field which will be defended with,

“We don’t know. We can’t figure that out. There is no way to determine that,”

to half the questions in the field.

Still, I would argue that it’s possible to do some adequate scientific work in most social sciences, even if most of your colleagues accuse you of trying to answer unanswerable questions. Sure there are no hard facts as in physics or math, but there are a lot of things that are “more or less true” where some sort of a vague answer to the question seems to be the best explanation of the facts.


Filed under Philosophy, Politics, Psychology, Ridiculousness, Scholarship, Science, Sociology

Lynn, Rushton, Murray and Jensen Are Taken Very Seriously as Scholars in Their Branch of Psychology

Afrosapiens writes:

“Lynn, Rushton, Jensen and Murray are taken extremely seriously in the field of the study of intelligence”

Neuroscience, which is the science of brain function does not take the non-specialists you cite seriously. Actually, it makes no use of their works whatsoever.

But they don’t work in neuroscience. They work in the study of human intelligence, which is a branch of psychology.

Actually, Lynn, Rushton, Murray and Jensen are very well respected in the study of human intelligence, which is a branch of psychology, not neuroscience. The mainstream journal of the field is Intelligence, a rigorous peer reviewed journal that meets the finest standards of science.

This journal regularly publishes the work of Murray, Rushton, Jensen and Lynn and a few other people who think along the same lines. I know that Jim Flynn was personal friends with both Richard Lynn and Philippe Rushton. I have seen a photograph of the three men at a conference with their arms around each other, Flynn in the middle and Rushton and Lynn on either side of him. Flynn doesn’t look uncomfortable at all. He looks like he is with his best friends.

“It is scientific consensus now that genes play a major role in human behavior and intelligence”

No, there is no evidence of it and mainstream neuroscience and genetics only suspect a genetic contribution with not as much certitude as non-specialist psychologists and political scientists.

It is scientific consensus among psychologists.


Filed under Intelligence, Neuroscience, Psychology, Scholarship, Science

The Right and the Left in the West Both Hate Science

The Left likes to claim that the Right wages a war on science.

Well of course they do. Whenever a scientific study’s results are bad for the bottom line of the capitalists, obviously the facts are wrong once again we need to go make up some better facts. This is why science and capitalism are in serious conflict. Many to most “scientifically-based” government decisions are not based on science at all and in fact reject all known science on the matter as false. Instead they make up a completely new set of facts to base the decision on, a result that is in accord with politics. We see this in particular in environmental science. Endangered species are a catastrophic case. Political hacks who run the Fish and Wildlife Service are constantly rejecting the findings of all of their scientists and instead issuing completely false anti-scientific findings that are good for the capitalists but bad for the critter in question.

However the Left is profoundly antiscientific on PC matters. What this means is that whenever scientific study uncovers facts that may lead to racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia or whatever the bullshit ism or phobia de jure is, the Left completely rejects the science and makes up a new false conclusion by inventing new facts. Even worse, the Left calls it “scientific racism” or some nonsense just because the facts didn’t come out right and the Left had to go in and readjust the facts so people’s feelings didn’t get hurt. Then they go on a jihad against the scientist and try to have him fired and his career ruined for uncovering “illegal facts.”

This is known as Scientific Fraud. However the Left engages in massive scientific fraud as does the Right.

The entire PC Left, Cultural Left, Cultural Marxist, SJW movement is engaging in scientific fraud on a massive scale. Further, they are punishing scientists for not coming up with the conclusions that have not been pre-approved by the Left Commissars.


Filed under Conservatism, Cultural Marxists, Endangered Species, Environmentalism, Government, Left, Political Science, Politics, Scholarship, Science, Scum, US Politics, Useless Western Left