Sunday, February 24, 2013

Please Show Us The WHOLE Sequencing Data!

4-21-13 UPDATE IV

"For those of you who think the "Angel DNA" conversation with Dr. Melba Ketchum released yesterday is photoshopped, here's the truth from the person who released it.'s Rhetman Mullis had urged Dr. Melba Ketchum to "do the right thing" and collaborate with other scientists such as Dr. Sykes to ensure her methodology and science was sound. In early 2012, after submitting samples and having long conversations with Ketchum, Rhetman realized that there was a problem and found Ketchum's conclusions highly "questionable". Here's a statement from Rhettman Mullis regarding Dr. Melba Ketchum and why he chose to release his conversations with her:"

I was privy to this information shortly after it happened and it is one of the main reasons many of us had so many doubts about her credibility before her self-publication of unsubstantiated "data" took place 2 months ago.

Read More at Bigfoot Evidence: Rhettman Mullis Explains The Release of His Conversation With Dr. Melba Ketchum

2-28-13 UPDATE III: 

The complete Report on the Sierra Site Sample now in!

History of “Sierra Kills” Tissue Submission & Testing (Frozen & Salt-Cured Tissue)
- By Bart Cutino 

"As I’ve stated previously in my summary attachment to our Trent University report regarding the “circumstantial” Sierras tissue, our objective and responsibility to the public, fellow researchers, the hunter/submitters and frankly ourselves, was to independently contract multiple labs to screen this sample as a precautionary measure and hopefully rule out “all” potential North American mammalian candidate contributors." Continue Here

2-26-13 UPDATE II:  

Breaking News!  Real Geneticist who has analyzed the available Ketchum "Sequencing" says it is a combination of human chromosome 11, cat, dog and panda bear, amongst other things, and is the result of contamination/mixing and poor technique. Watch 6 real Scientists discuss all aspects of her self publication here:

UPDATE:  Many of you have been citing the small sequences of genomic data that Ketchum included in one of her "supplements" as the sequencing I am calling for.  This is just a small amount which she has removed from the whole genomic context, an amount far too small to prove her claims of having completed the entire genomic sequencing on several individuals of a new species, individuals who supposedly differ enough from all other known species to be a new, or hybrid one, but which resemble each other enough to be considered the same "novel species".  The small nucleotide region/s she has included do not prove what she is asserting.  As an example it would be like someone saying their address is 123, so they must be the person who lives at 123 Street Name, City, State, Zip Code, without showing that the person does indeed live at the same street, city, and state.  

Small sequences could just be a mutation/difference in one individual, but which would not make them a new species.  We all have these differences, that is why each individual's DNA is like a fingerprint, no two are exactly alike except in the case of identical twins, as they derive from the same egg/sperm combination so their DNA is shared before they split from one another.  This is why DNA evidence is taken so seriously in a court of law.  She needs to turn over these full sequencing genomes to qualified geneticists to have them confirmed.  Dr. Meldrum and Dr. Sykes would be glad to assist with this I am sure, so her argument that she can't do so because the "mainstream" does not take her seriously is a clear fallacy.  

I have added some new articles below as well! 

A review of the latest opinions on the DNA Results, including the Sierras Evidence Initiative's disclosure on their sample which was included in the Ketchum study!  (See Below)

Data Processing
Well for all of you who have been trying to keep up with everything surrounding the release of the Ketchum "Paper", below are links to many of the latest evaluations by credible sources.  Once I am all moved and have gotten settled into my new job I am hoping that Ketchum herself will have finally released the "Amazing Data" related to her supposed Bigfoot Genome Sequencing.  Then at last some real analysis can begin on whether or not she has succeeded, as her non-peer reviewed self-publication has claimed.  It is 12 days now since her paper was self-published and still no sign of that actual new "genomic" data.

I had hoped wholeheartedly over the last 2 years that she would accomplish what she had been promising, despite all the behind the scenes stories I was hearing from my friends and colleagues who were working with her, and who were becoming very concerned with her credibility.  Not only because of the way she seemed to be milking her study for cash, but because of the bizarre religious connotations she was making about what her study would prove.  These claims changed depending on who she was talking to and what they wanted to hear, but some of the claims where that "they" had either alien or angelic DNA present.......The last we heard from her on Coast to Coast Radio was that she was abandoning her DNA work to do further research at her "Habituation Site" (should be right around 52min 25sec in the Interview).

Genomic Sequencing
Personally I don't care what Sasquatch turn out to be or where they actually fit into our family tree, I just want to know the TRUTH about what they are.  I was hoping we would see some real science to back up all the witness reports and personal experiences which make up the current circumstantial evidence for the likely existence of the Sasquatch species, whatever that species turns out to be.  Sadly no one has yet to accomplish this feat, and I can only keep on hoping that Dr. Skyes at Oxford does produce irrefutable data that we can all celebrate in it's accuracy and legitimacy!  

You can read about the Scientific Process here, and hopefully get an idea of how and why the Ketchum study has so far failed to adhere to these standards, let alone release the actual sequencing data, leading to the grave disappointment of so many of us who understand why it should have been so important to do so:  What Is Science And Is It Important To Bigfoot?.  After all she has circumvented the actual Journalistic Peer Review Process by publishing her own data (Sorry folks but there is no evidence of the legitimate Journal she claims to have bought, and why would she do that and then obliterate all record of it's past publications and Academic Review Board????), yet she is now claiming she can't release her sequencing due to Genbank's discrepancies not her own, so why not just Self-Publish your Sequencing data too Dr. Ketchum?  Show us the "Meat" that your claims are based on, or perhaps I should say "Steak"......

I still hold out some hope that something can be salvaged from all this, as so many good and legitimate people were involved in the sample collection and funding of this project.  But until her actual sequencing data is seen I remain unconvinced of anything but her lack of professionalism, which is all that the news stories quoted below have had to base their opinions on as well:


Dr. Meldrum's first statement on how the DNA paper was released:
[JEFF SPEAKING] The journal was created on a GoDaddy template on Feb 4, by a third party, with a one-year contract. There is no information about who is editing the "journal" or who the members of an editorial board might be. I queried the contact feature on this matter but have received no reply. This does not appear to be a refereed journal. It appears to merely be a front for a self-published report. The sequences have not been uploaded to Genbank.  

Project Sasquatch


“It’s clearly a fake Vanity Journal with lots of ShutterStock pictures, misspellings and it was only created on 2/4/13. I’ve only read the abstract and conclusion and neither makes any sense.”

More at SciGuy


"She remained silent for the last two months before finally posting a link to her paper on an online journal called ‘Denovo Scientific Journal.' The only problem is the journal did not exist before 9 days ago! It was literally created to self-publish her material, basically circumventing the peer-review process. She later explained her reason for doing this was because of "scientific bias" among the journals she submitted to. So, instead of sending complementary copies to genetic specialists to garner some kind of credibility, she has opted to send them to independent Bigfoot researchers--the direct opposite of peer-review. That's like giving cotton candy to a child; of course they are going to like it. Everyone else who wants to read the paper has to pay her $30. Most journals charge "per article" prices for those without a university proxy, but what I find most troubling about the situation is that Ketchum's DNA sequencing company is tanking. It currently has a rating of "F" from the Better Business Bureau. This has led some people to speculate that she dreamed the paper up to rake in cash from Bigfoot enthusiasts."
More at Research Gate 


On behalf of myself and The Olympic Project, I'd really like to clarify a few things about the Ketchum paper and the Denovo Journal. Let me make this very clear. Our role in this effort was simply to provide samples for this study. We did indeed supply many samples including hair, tissue and saliva. I have been in support of her effort since the beginning because I was extremely happy that someone stood up and was willing to take this on with hopes of bettering BF research. Our part in this was simple. We gathered samples, submitted them and sat back with high hopes. Beyond that, we have nothing to do with the way the paper came out, and we have nothing to do with how it's structured. We are simply submitters. I have been receiving many phone calls and pm messages with a large variety of questions and inquiries. Folks, I can't answer all these questions. They are not my questions to answer, please refer to Melbas team. My personal submission was the Sierra sample. Genome sequencing was performed on this sample at Texas university. It's my hope that the test results from this analysis can now be looked at by qualified eyes in the scientific community and more can be learned about it.

Thank you,
Derek Randles.
Olympic Project


"It would be a huge story if all the work done by Ketchum and her team ultimately leads to scientific confirmation of the reality of Sasquatch. But at this point, the new wrinkles about the DeNovo Science Journal have only added to the credibility issues by a foot or two -- a Bigfoot."

"However, geneticists who have seen the paper are not impressed. “To state the obvious, no data or analyses are presented that in any way support the claim that their samples come from a new primate or human-primate hybrid," Leonid Kruglyak of Princeton University told the Houston Chronicle. “Instead, analyses either come back as 100 percent human, or fail in ways that suggest technical artifacts.”

More at "The Scientist"


"To make an end-run around the process by erecting a facade in the form of a so-called new journal and allege that it is edited and reviewed, without providing any of that information on the public web page, it appears that she has undertaken an effort to self-publish, just to get it out there," Meldrum told The Huffington Post. "And, to boot, she's charging $30 a pop for a copy of the paper."
"The issue(s) as I see it is the way the study has been conducted and presented. Science has no room for cloak and dagger behind the curtain secrecy. There have been numerous inconsistencies, if not flat out lies, obvious signs of an agenda being pushed, and now what seems to be profiteering taking place. NDA's, copyrights for book and film deals, viewing fees, teaser clips of videos, business contracts, financial partnerships, I fail to see how these are normal and acceptable parts of a non-biased scientific inquiry."


"The DeNovo Scientific Journal has no other studies, articles, papers or reviews, and only Ketchum’s paper has been “published” by the journal, NBC News pointed out. It also is not subscribed to by any major library or university, and its website apparently didn’t exist until three weeks ago. In the words of LiveScience’s Benjamin Radford, “It is not an existing, known or respected journal in any sense of the word.”

More at Time Magazine


The Sierras Initiative Information Release:

The Sierras Site Initiative led by Bart Cutino posts a statement about why they felt the need to do independent testing of the circumstantial Smeja sample:  Thank you Justin Smeja for respecting Wally Hersom's wishes that you not speak out about your experience with Ketchum until after she had taken her study to it's conclusion.

The Sierra Sites DNA report and full data which conflicts with the Ketchum claims:


Listen as Jeffrey Kelley addresses the Ketchum claims of sample discrepancy:


"It couldn’t be that the paper STARTED with the premise that Sasquatch is real and the data she collected now PROVES that. There are lines of evidence that show she had already come up with her hypothesis long before she was able to “confirm” it through these nuDNA results. That would be sham inquiry to me – when you already have the answer in mind and work backwards. It’s not good science."

"Science is a tough gauntlet to run. She complained about the time it took, how picky everyone was, the skepticism she got. I don’t have much sympathy. That’s how it goes. It’s not the best system but it’s the best one we have right now to weed out all the trash. If you want the respect from the scientific community, you must do these annoying and tedious things. And squarely face your critics. Instead, Melba has chosen to plead her case to the sympathetic pro-Bigfoot audience, like the audience of Coast to Coast AM. Twice. Some advice: that is exactly the LAST thing you should be doing to gain credibility. Science isn’t done on late night radio and Facebook. It doesn’t take a scientist to tell you that. But many Bigfooters can see that this is certainly NOT what they hoped from the promises of this DNA study."

Read more at Doubtful News


"Ketchum referenced the Milinkovitch paper as circumstantial evidence of Sasquatch across the modern world for centuries and the referenced literature is incontrovertible proof of their existence.

There's only one problem with the paper she cited. It's a damn April jokes from 2004. Apparently, the paper is well-known to many students and it is often brought up as one of the best known April Fools jokes in research literature. This is even noted in the paper itself:"

Read more at Bigfoot Evidence


"Or, long story short: what happened, in the period immediately preceding the appearance of the JAMEZ on about Jan. 4, 2013, that could have suddenly lit a very hot fire under Dr. Ketchum, causing her to seemingly rush into a bizarre and poorly-executed succession of “journals” and self-publication?"

" On December 26, one Tyler Huggins published, on several sites, the results of independent testing of what has been called the centerpiece of Dr. Ketchum’s paper, sample #26, aka The Sierra Steak, collected by Justin Smeja. Why, you ask, would this have upset Dr. Ketchum’s often-stated determined plan to have her paper published in a quality peer-reviewed scientific journal? Let’s list the ways:  

Read this extensive list here at Over the line, Smokey!


"We pulled out some of Dr. Kokjohn's questions, but also provided the email from Dr. Kokjohn so you can see the questions in context.

  1. What happened to the original founder species?
  2. The Hybrids are abundant, yet the founder species is extinct?
  3. How could a hypothetical species so close to modern humans to interbreed and produce viable, fertile offspring not share homology to the same entities in their extended family?
  4. Where did the sequences not in GenBank originate?
Dr. Kokjohn added, "I am not impressed with the data I have seen, but from that I draw no conclusions regarding the existence or non-existence of Bigfoot."

It should be noted we reached out to Dr. Melba Ketchum to see if she had any insight to any of these questions; we gave her ample time to respond and she did not have a comment at the time of this post." 

Read more at The Bigfoot Lunch Club

From My 2-12-13 "On My Mind Right Now" Page

Tuesday, February 12th, 2013:

Has Ketchum Committed Professional Suicide?
Well Melba Ketchum has just hammered the last nail into the coffin of her scientific credibility. She has created a website posing as a real Scientific Journal in order to publish her own paper without any actual review or corroboration from other members of the Academic Community.  This is not how legitimate data becomes part of our scientific knowledge base.  This is how those who practice Pseudoscience operate.  Read about the announcement here: Bigfoot Evidence

This, "Denovo A Scientific Journal", is a brand new website with no history of actual publications. I can find no record of this being a real "Journal" or any past issues or papers from other authors that have been published by them.  She has just created this as a way to fool the naive into thinking she has been accepted by a real peer reviewed journal.

Anyone can make up a fake Journal on a new Website and publish anything they want. This proves nothing except that she is the fraud all of us who have been practicing critical thinking have come to believe she was months ago......

Registered through:, LLC ( Domain Name: DENOVOJOURNAL.COM Created on: 04-Feb-13 Expires on: 04-Feb-14 Last Updated on: 04-Feb-13

Ding Dong the Fraud has just committed professional suicide.  Long live Dr Sykes..........

Read about pseudoscience and why real peer review is imperative to real science here:  What Is Science And Is It Important To Bigfoot? 

UDATE - The Scientific Community is weighing in:

From  SciGuy - A science blog with Eric Berger  

"If Ketchum really had the goods she would have co-authored the paper with reputable scientists and gotten the work published in a reputable scientific journal. Instead she’s playing to an audience that doesn’t understand how science works, that wants to believe Bigfoot exists and is willing to send her some cash to further their delusions."  

"How did she get it published?

Well, she says she bought an existing journal and renamed it (the Journal of Cosmology was on the market, and I hoped most fervently that that was it…but no, JoC is still online). So she owns the journal. It’s now called De Novo.

Then she came out with a special edition. It’s Volume 1, Issue 1. It contains precisely one paper, hers.

You should be laughing by this point."  
From Doubtful News:

"We finally see the other authors, at least. Note that none are academics, but forensic specialists. Problem one.

Problem two: This is a brand new journal. Was it launched JUST for this paper? Well, this is an interesting and HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS twist. We do not know what the standards are for review. There are no rules for starting up your own journal and calling it “peer reviewed”. And, indeed, that’s what was done

Problem three: The paper costs $30 to download. No academic institution is going to have access to a new journal site so they will have to pay to review it. Some Bigfoot bloggers have received embargoed copies. Bigfoot bloggers. With NO scientific qualifications. I have yet to see any genetic specialists comment on the paper but it’s very early and I expect some will. I have requested access to the paper.

Problem four: Excuses. Check this out from the Sasquatch Genome Project page

My initial opinions of this latest news? It’s a fiasco. It’s unprofessional and disappointing. The websites are amateurish, the goals are delusional and it smacks of a self-serving money-making venture. Melba has positioned herself as a self-named expert with additional projects set up to collect funds and protect an animal she insists exists. It has not been confirmed, contrary to her opinion that she has “proven” it."



  1. Great article Ms. Moore! I am very skeptical of Ketchum's claims. If she is willing to lie about a bear sample being from a Homo sapiens subspecies, then she would likely be willing to lie about a nonhuman primate sample being from a Homo sapiens subspecies. I personally wonder if she received some coaxing from the "habituators", who she has associated herself with so much, to say that these are people.

  2. thanks nadia,

    far from having any understanding about dna testing here, but would wonder the following:

    has any reputable geneticist seen the paper an at least commented on the techniques?

    if the techniques are solid, can data be fudged to come up with any results?

    if not, is there consistency from the results to conclusions drawn, or is there an unsubstantiated leap?

    thirty dollars notwithstanding, i wouldn't download the paper as i'm sure the science would mean nothing to me. if ever someone in the field evaluates the paper, get a link on bigfootevidence!

  3. Thanks for the comments! I will be replying individually, as well as to the several which seem to have been removed by their authors, as soon as I get a chance but I wanted to let you know that I appreciate the feedback!

  4. LARK, I am not ignoring your comment, I just want to have time to address all the points you brought up and have not had time to do so. Thanks for reading and please see the updates I have added since your first comment came in.