I apologize for being so remiss in reporting on this.
Steve Austin knows the truth
As you may recall last November there was a bit of a to-do about a Texas geneticist from Nacogdoches, Melba Ketchum, who claimed to have sequenced DNA from a Bigfoot. That’s quite a feat considering this a creature that does not exist in the real world.
At the time I reported on a number of significant issues with the claims Ketchum was making.
Now she has finally found a scientific journal to publish her manuscript — a journal, DeNovo, that happened to not exist until this week.
Anyway, here’s the paper’s abstract:
One hundred eleven samples of blood, tissue, hair, and other types of specimens were studied, characterized and hypothesized to be obtained from elusive hominins in North America commonly referred to as Sasquatch. DNA was extracted and purified from a subset of these samples that survived rigorous screening for wildlife species identification. Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) sequencing, specific genetic loci sequencing, forensic short tandem repeat (STR) testing, whole genome single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) bead array analysis, and next generation whole genome sequencing were conducted on purported Sasquatch DNA samples gathered from various locations in North America. Additionally, histopathologic and electron microscopic examination were performed on a large tissue sample. vel non-human DNA.
And here’s the news release announcing the paper’s publication. It all sounds science-y and stuff, doesn’t it?
Too bad it’s almost certainly Bigfoot scat. The big question is why Ketchum would pick this journal to publish findings that if true would be monumental. It would be the scientific discovery of the decade, at least.
And she picks a brand-new journal? Smells a little fishy, no?
Eric “SciGuy” Berger subsequently received a copy of the paper and solicited some feedback from geneticists, who reacted about as you’d expect they would. At this point it’s just a matter of a credible person testing the samples and letting us know what they’re really from. But until then, now you know where things stand.
Pingback: What’s the difference between a rock and a fossilized Bigfoot skull? – Off the Kuff